[PD-dev] argc&argv and dollarexpansion
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:
[blah blah blah] <- variable number of arguments taken starting with $2
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