Multiple definitions - templates & lists

umläute zmoelnig at
Fri Oct 8 17:19:26 CEST 1999

"36.zZw_zRtW.910.32" wrote:

> hehe
> > I've got a few questions - tried to findem in the archive - no joy :(
> >
> > 1. is there any simple way of avoiding "multiply defined" type errors when
> > using arrays within an abstraction?  eg. can each instance of an abstraction
> > in a patch, have its own copy of an array named say "fred"?
> >
> > or will I perhaps need to devise some tricky way of appending a unique id to
> > the name, renaming fred "fred-id" - then letting the other objects in the
> > abstraction know the new name of the array in case they need to access?
> use it like this in an abstraction:
> table $1
> then have your superwindow say:
> pd myjodelabstract blub

ah, jo, that´s what I wanted to ask sometime ago too...

the thing with the $1 works fine, if you don´t mind to imagine thousands of
Wini mentioned that he´s heard of $0 returning a unique ID but none of us could
get this to work so I think it was just very awful fama.
Since (I guess that) each window actually does have a unique-ID, why not make it
available to the public (via $0 (?)); this would make "generation" of patches
much more easy
(and, by the way, the number of myjodeltable, yourjodeltable, hisjodeltable, ...
is definitely not infinite !)


More information about the Pd-list mailing list