[PD] mrpeach routeOSC behaves differently then its previous release?
Jonathan Wilkes
jancsika at yahoo.com
Tue Mar 13 00:04:47 CET 2012
----- Original Message -----
> From: Hans-Christoph Steiner <hans at at.or.at>
> To: yvan volochine <yvan.pd at gmail.com>
> Cc: pd-list <pd-list at iem.at>
> Sent: Monday, March 12, 2012 6:36 PM
> Subject: Re: [PD] mrpeach routeOSC behaves differently then its previous release?
>
> On 03/12/2012 06:06 PM, yvan volochine wrote:
>> On 03/12/2012 02:54 PM, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
>>> IMHO, [routeOSC] should accept these two as the same thing:
>>>
>>> [/bla/1/blabli 0.437(
>>> [list /bla/1/blabli 0.437(
>>>
>>> It'll make life easier for a lot of people, and I can't see any
>>> disadvantage in that setup.
>>
>> well, in pd in general, [list foo bar( is not exactly the same as [foo
>> bar(, unless I'm missing something (if so, please, feel free to
>> enlighten me ;)).
>>
>> why not change also the behavior of [route] (and tons of other
>> objects) to make life easier for a lot of people ??
>>
>> I don't really see the point.. [routeOSC] expects an OSC path, [list
>> /foo/bar 666( is obviously not one.
>>
>> my 20 COP anyway.
>
> I personally think it would be great to get rid of the separation
> between lists and non-list messages (i.e. lists of atoms that start with
> a symbol other than "list"). But that's a big project that will
> break
> backwards compatibility.
In this world of no lists would bang be the equivalent of what is currently
an empty list?
>
> Changing specific objects to ignore the difference can be done now
> without compatibility concerns.
>
> .hc
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pd-list at iem.at mailing list
> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
>
More information about the Pd-list
mailing list