[PD] Segmented Patch Chords? PVar / PV?

[Mathieu Bouchard]

On Mon, 13 Feb 2006, Roman Haefeli wrote:

> i never had any problems with readability of my patches.

I've had problems with readability of my patches even though I've never 
used segmented patchcords (so, i'm not spoiled!). I can't make connection 
cycles without having patchcords go over objects (except some special 
cases). The alternative is to add a pair of [s]/[r] to the existing 
confusion.

> i think there are few alternative ways to keep a patch readable than
> segmented patch chords, using subpatches or abstractions in order to
> create sections with a special functionality. sometimes i even use a
> [send]/[receive]-pair instead of a patch cord, just for readability

When it's just that i want to avoid cluttering a patch that's already too
big, i don't mind using [s]/[r] pairs, but sometimes I have only a handful
of objects and there's an objectbox i can't read unless i move it or one
of the surrounding objects (so that the cords move out of the way), and i 
can't make all objectboxes clearly readable unless I put them in a very 
unnatural position.

But then, I've said that for 3 years...

> $0-send/receive: what would be the difference to a NOT-fake-mechanism?

Avoiding pollution of the symbol-table?

 _ _ __ ___ _____ ________ _____________ _____________________ ...
| Mathieu Bouchard - tél:+1.514.383.3801 - http://artengine.ca/matju
| Freelance Digital Arts Engineer, Montréal QC Canada