Multiple definitions - templates & lists

umläute zmoelnig at iem.mhsg.ac.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
jodeltable-names.
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 !)

hannes




More information about the Pd-list mailing list