[PD-dev] loadbang order

[Tim Blechmann]

> > there are basically two ways how abstractions communicate with each
> > other: inlets and receives. i'd propose that every inlet / outlet /
> > receive declares a loadbang function. before this loadbang function
> > has been run, the outlet events are queued (maybe using clock
> > callbacks), then then the behaviour is the same as currently. for
> > the outlets it's more tricky, since they'd have to register a
> > loadbang on the parent canvas.
> 
> I don't understand what you mean by all of this. Do you have an
> example?
it's like having an abstraction like this after the inlets:

|inlet data|
|
| |loadbang|
| |
| |flush(
|/             
|pipe infinity|
|
|outlet data|

misusing pipe as message queue ...

> My suggestion would be that [loadbang] would take a single argument
> which  would be an integer interpreted as a priority order, with a
> default value  of zero. Negative values would be accepted.
similar to gemheads ... this would solve about about 99.999% of the
cases, unless someone uses loadbang f, where f is the lowest number
represented by t_float / the lowest number that a pd patch can save...

well, i somehow like to have a solution covering all cases ...

still thinking ... tim

-- 
mailto:TimBlechmann at gmx.de    ICQ: 96771783
http://www.mokabar.tk

latest mp3: kMW.mp3
http://mattin.org/mp3.html

latest cd: Goh Lee Kwang & Tim Blechmann: Drone
http://www.geocities.com/gohleekwangtimblechmannduo/

After one look at this planet any visitor from outer space 
would say "I want to see the manager."
				      William S. Burroughs