hmm, I am sorry, I don't think I got what you meant... could you give an example please?<div><br></div><div>The way I see is that $1...$n are related to the inheritance concept. They could be used inside [send~] & [receive~] objects to force some sort of locality, but you can't really guarantee locality by that, it is just some way around that is not 100% safe, cause if you have [s $1-gain] in an abstraction, and $1 inheriting "A" for instance, a [s A-gain] object in a parent patch (or even on another opened patch) would still get the value globally.</div>
<div><br></div><div>cheers</div><div>alex</div><div><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 5:28 PM, Matt Barber <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:brbrofsvl@gmail.com">brbrofsvl@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">Without $0, one would have to use $1 ... $n for locality. $0 of a<br>
parent patch often needs to be passed as $1 to a child for proper<br>
locality, for instance, so I don't think they are necessarily THAT<br>
different conceptually.<br>
<font color="#888888"><br>
Matt<br>
</font><div><div></div><div class="h5"><br>
On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 11:49 AM, Alexandre Porres <<a href="mailto:porres@gmail.com">porres@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>> Calling this an exception creates<br>
>> the impression, that $1 in a message<br>
>> is the same as in an object.<br>
> Hmm, I see you have a point! But I am just used to consider "$0" and "$1, $2<br>
> ... $n" different/separate things, being "$0" solely a locality sintax.<br>
> Putting them as separate concepts I see "$1, $2 ... $n" as two different<br>
> things wether in messages or objects, and that "$0" is just useless in<br>
> messages.<br>
> Anyway, I am cool with what needs to be done in order to put "$0" in<br>
> messages, I still think it's a bit of an unnecessary hassle, but it ain't<br>
> that much of a big deal after all.<br>
> The thing that had no other way around was using the Find feature to<br>
> actually find them, so I thought about bringing this all up: the hassle and<br>
> the problem.<br>
> I now see that uncheking "whole word" in the new version is just another<br>
> "way around" rather than actually getting the Find feature to look for "$0",<br>
> or even for the window number once we explicitly tell it which one it is.<br>
> So, nerverminding about "$0" in messages, I would still make a point here<br>
> for the Find feature to be able to find "$0", I hope it isn't much hassle<br>
> getting it to do so.<br>
> Thanks a bunch folks!<br>
> Cheers<br>
> alex<br>
><br>
> On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 8:03 AM, Roman Haefeli <<a href="mailto:reduzierer@yahoo.de">reduzierer@yahoo.de</a>> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> Am 12.11.09 17:21 schrieb "Alexandre Porres" unter <<a href="mailto:porres@gmail.com">porres@gmail.com</a>>:<br>
>><br>
>> > But I totally disagree, I have been teaching a lot basic Pd around, and<br>
>> > people<br>
>> > always get confused and think they can just throw "$0" in messages. So I<br>
>> > have<br>
>> > to state and reinforce that there is an exception that it doesn't work<br>
>> > on<br>
>> > messages.<br>
>><br>
>> Calling this an exception creates the impression, that $1 in a message<br>
>> is the same as in an object.<br>
>><br>
>> > Without an exception at all, it should be easier to get it, as I<br>
>> > understand.<br>
>><br>
>> Agreed. But currently, the only thing that makes $0 in a message<br>
>> exceptional<br>
>> is the fact, that it has no meaning at all. Making it be replaced by the<br>
>> canvas identifier wouldn't make it less exceptional at all.<br>
>><br>
>> roman<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> ___________________________________________________________<br>
>> Der frühe Vogel fängt den Wurm. Hier gelangen Sie zum neuen Yahoo! Mail:<br>
>> <a href="http://mail.yahoo.de" target="_blank">http://mail.yahoo.de</a><br>
><br>
><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>