<html><head><style type="text/css"><!-- DIV {margin:0px;} --></style></head><body><div style="font-family:times new roman,new york,times,serif;font-size:12pt"><div>Hi list,<br> What's the story on the following patch?<br><span><strong></strong></span><br>[initbang]/[closebang] for patch constructor/destuctor - ID: 1544041<br><br>I know it says the status is "open," but on the other hand this patch was added <br>in 2006. From the related threads on pd user and dev, all I've seen are repeated <br>hopes from various developers that these objects be included as internal<br>objects in pd.<br><br>The only negative comment I've seen was indirectly from dmotd on<br> 2009-03-14, quoting Miller:<br><br>"Anyhow, I'm trying to think of a better mechanism for allowing abstractions<br>to have variable numbers of inlets/outlets, so I'm hoping initbang won't<br>be necessary in the long run.<br><br>closebang, though, will probably be
needed in some form or other."<br><br>I'd like to ask: what is the problem with [initbang] as it is, and what would <br>a "better mechanism" look like? If a "better mechanism" is not currently <br>in the works, could these two objects be included in pd-vanilla so that in the <br>meantime people can make abstractions that have dynamic numbers of <br>inlets/outlets that will work on both versions of pd? (I've never used <br>[closebang] but I imagine the same reasoning holds for it as well.)<br><br>Similar questions about:<br>$@ and $# expansion (argc, argv) - ID: 1543850<br><br>It looks like the discussion just stopped, and I couldn't find any threads on user or dev list. <br>$@ would be very useful, as well as matju's suggestion about some kind of "nth argument <br>and all the rest that follow."<br><br>-Jonathan<br></div>
</div><br>
</body></html>