[PD] [inlet], [outlet].

[Miller Puckette]

Hi all,

I believe the order is undefined, and nonetheless in Pd's implementation
it's in the order the connections were made in (and in Max's, it's right
to left)... in other words, patches whose behavior depends on the order
of connection might break when ported from one program to the other...

cheers
Miller

On Wed, May 07, 2003 at 10:48:03AM -0700, Josh Steiner wrote:
> ok, aparently i was spreading misinformation about order being 
> determined by the order the objects were connected, i just found out 
> where i got that idea, its in the documentation:
> 
> pd/doc/1.manual/x5.htm
> 
> In Max/MSP, if an object's outlet is connected to several destinations, 
> corresponding messages are always sent in right-to-left screen order. In 
> Pd, the messages are sent in the order you made the connections in. In 
> either case, in situations where you care about the order it's 
> appropriate to use a "trigger" object to specify.
> 
> ---
> 
> if indeed this is meant to be "undefined" behavior that might change at 
> some point in the future, this document really should be changed to 
> reflect that.
> 
> -josh
> 
> guenter geiger wrote:
> 
> >>the order is declared to be *undefined*, not ``as created''.
> >>    
> >>
> >
> >Thanks Krzysztof for saying this clearly, I had a hard time reading
> >through this thread of misinformation and confusion.
> >
> >As to the inlet number argument:
> >-) AFAIK there is already an argument for inlets, which is used
> >for resampling, hence the implementation would cause a change in
> >functionality and all the patches that use resampling would probably
> >be broken.
> >
> >-) Personally I would prefer the unnumbered inlets, I think the
> >"one object that creates several inlets" idea would be a nice alternative
> >to Mathieu's proposal.
> >
> >-) trigger is not a kludge, if it has a bug, you are free to send a patch.
> >
> >Greetings,
> >
> >Guenter
> >
> >On Wed, 7 May 2003, Krzysztof Czaja wrote:
> >
> >  
> >
> >>hi Thomas, marius...
> >>
> >>The ``as created'' order should be regarded as a mere
> >>implementation detail, which may be changed in any future Pd
> >>release (as already had been once in the past, afaik).
> >>
> >>I would not agree that the original (i.e. the max) way is any
> >>'better'.  Max patch may be broken just by someone moving an
> >>object (a sink) on screen.
> >>
> >>rsKzytfzo
> >>
> >>Thomas Grill wrote:
> >> >>(and please no change to the order of messages from "in_the
> >> >
> >> > _order_created"
> >>...
> >> > To my mind it's extremely important to see (in which way ever) instantly how
> >> > the order is. In this sense i would really like to have the Max style also
> >> > for PD.
> >>
> >>
> >>_______________________________________________
> >>PD-list mailing list
> >>PD-list at iem.kug.ac.at
> >>http://iem.kug.ac.at/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pd-list
> >>
> >>    
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >PD-list mailing list
> >PD-list at iem.kug.ac.at
> >http://iem.kug.ac.at/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pd-list
> >  
> >
> 
> 
> -- 
> ____________________________________________________
> independent u.s. drum'n'bass -- http://vitriolix.com
> 
> 
>