[PD-dev] initbang and friends WAS: run-up to release 0.43

IOhannes m zmölnig zmoelnig at iem.at
Fri Aug 20 11:42:22 CEST 2010

Hash: SHA1

On 08/20/2010 12:37 AM, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
> While I can't really comment on the implementation since i haven't
> reviewed it in depth, I can say that I am a fan of having the interface
> be a series of *bang objects over having a [loadbang] with arguments.  I
> think its nice, simple, and clear.  Then we also can have things like
> [propertybang] for implementing Properties panels in abstractions.

ahm, what is wrong with the [propertybang] as found in iemguts?
and how would the inclusion of [initbang] be related to this?

or is it just a general comment on why you (and me :-)) prefer a number
of *bang objects over e.g. [loadbang close]

as for the implementation: i don't care if it was implemented differently.
iirc, i tried to follow the implementation style as closely as that of
the rest of Pd ;-)

> Also, I've used [initbang] some in Pd-extended and so far it works well.
> [closebang] is tricky because the patch is being deleted when its
> triggered.

well yes, that's the idea of [closebang], no?
i don't really understand what is tricky about it.


Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/


More information about the Pd-dev mailing list