[PD-dev] [route] improvement?

[IOhannes m zmoelnig]

David Sabine wrote:
> Hello all,
> 
> I've noticed an oddity in the [route] object.  I don't want to alarm anyone,
> as there's really no problem.but this is just food for thought.
> 
> Consider this for a moment: [trigger s b] or [trigger f b]
> 
> These are trigger objects which sends a symbol+bang or a float+bang.
> 
> Now consider: [route s b] or [route f b]
> 
> This object fails because [route] doesn't allow us to abbreviate the atom
> type.  Wouldn't it be nice to abbreviate the name of the atom type in the
> route object?  Could this be accomplished in future versions without causing
> backwards-compatibility issues?  [route l b s f a] would be much more
> friendly (in terms of onscreen real estate) than [route list bang symbol
> float anything].
> 
> Would this cause any issues if I sent a list to [route] in which the first
> element is "f"? (for example) or "a"?
> 
> Does anybody have any thoughts about this?

yes, it would break quite everything
if you want to seperate atoms by their type, you might either use the 
[route] as you proposed (with "symbol" or "float" instead of "s" and 
"f") and loose the atom type "symbol" for symbols (you would need an 
explicit [symbol] object afterwards or use [segregate] from zexy. (or 
another external i don't know)

mfg.as.rd
IOhannes