[PD-dev] argc&argv and dollarexpansion

Mathieu Bouchard matju at artengine.ca
Wed Aug 23 03:39:39 CEST 2006

On Tue, 22 Aug 2006, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:

> which basically means, that [$#( is redundant, as soon as there is a 
> [list lenght]. the latter would be more robust regarding incoming 
> messages. i just did it for completeness.

What does "completeness" mean here, considering that if [$#( is redundant, 
then the feature that it represents is already "complete" under another 

> which makes me think, that $@ is really a MUST.

What about a variation on $@ that passes all the arguments starting with 
one of your choice? I would like to be able a non-dynamic abstraction 
that can take some fixed number of arguments and then take the rest of its 
arguments as the contents of an objectbox. e.g. if I write:

[about 42 blah blah blah]

it could be equivalent to:

[- 42]
[blah blah blah] <- variable number of arguments taken starting with $2
[+ 42]

does that sound useful?

  _ _ __ ___ _____ ________ _____________ _____________________ ...
| Mathieu Bouchard - tél:+1.514.383.3801 - http://artengine.ca/matju
| Freelance Digital Arts Engineer, Montréal QC Canada

More information about the Pd-dev mailing list