[PD-dev] pack~/unpack~ (was Re: multichannel signals, preliminary support)

[Christof Ressi]

> Isn't "mux~/demux~" closest to what's actually happening? 
Unfortunately, these are also zexy objects ;-)

On 24.01.2023 11:52, Max wrote:
> Isn't "mux~/demux~" closest to what's actually happening?
> when "joining" two signals, I wouldn't expect them to be running in 
> parallel but being mixed together.
>
> m.
>
>
> On 24.01.23 02:50, Miller Puckette via Pd-dev wrote:
>> So merging (hmm) some ideas from Fede and Dan, maybe "join~/split~", and
>> a new tap~ object that allows you to pick channels out specifically.  
>> Then
>> I think for example "clone osc~" might do OK for making an oscillator 
>> bank -
>> assuming it turns out to be practical to send message-time lists to the
>> frequency input.  (Maybe that's someting clone should know how to do 
>> in other
>> situations too).
>>
>> still thinking about, for instance, "clone -" to make clones of an 
>> anonymous
>> abstraction that you just edit into being live...
>>
>> cheers
>> Miller
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pd-dev mailing list
> Pd-dev at lists.iem.at
> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev