[PD-dev] [initbang]/[closebang] routines requested for inclusion in pd vanilla branch..

Matt Barber brbrofsvl at gmail.com
Fri Jan 30 01:20:13 CET 2009


I also hereby clamor for this as well, although conservatively.  =o)

I have always wondered -- does [namecanvas] have any historical use
besides dynamic patching?  It is necessary for the kind of dynamic
patching you have in mind, since it's the name of the instance of the
abstraction which needs to be sent messages, not the name of the
abstraction class's patch.

Also, is there currently a way to dynamically delete individual patch
objects without using mouse and keyboard events (and without
[clear(-ing the whole patch)?


Thanks,

Matt




On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 12:27 PM, dmotd <dmotd at gmx.net> wrote:
> hello folks,
>
> it's been a couple of years since IOhannes submitted his patch for
> constructor/destructor routines.. as far as i know only pd-extended has picked
> up the patch. could miller please consider this for inclusion into his stable
> branch?
>
> without the [initbang] / [closebang] objects, pd is crippled to a static
> application of the abstraction philosophy, making it impossible to dynamically
> create inlets/outlets based on an abstractions arguments. this is really a
> silly limitation that has already been solved and should be put into regular
> practice where ever possible.
>
> while i understand that miller has been hesitant to include such
> functionality, i would prefer it to be an included but undocumented feature
> (much like the role that [namecanvas] presently takes)  than not included at
> all.
>
> anyhow, there's a chance this will fall on deaf ears, but i would just like to
> register my vote for permanent inclusion.
>
> many thanks as always,
>
> dmotd
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pd-dev mailing list
> Pd-dev at iem.at
> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
>




More information about the Pd-dev mailing list