[PD] Spigot Creation agruments?

[David Sabine]

To be quite frank,  I like the [spigot] more than MAX's [gate].  (I realize
that they offer different core functionality, but if I had to choose one or
the other - I'd choose [spigot].

It seems that [spigot] can be used easily to build gate-like
structures...but using [gate] for spigot-like functionality is not as
intuitive.

my 2 cents.

I do agree however with IOhannes, it would be nice to be able to
'initialize' spigot with either a "1" or "0".  But at the same time Miller,
I agree that until it works consistently that way, it would be better to
eliminate all possibility of defining creation arguments.

Regards,
Dave Sabine



----- Original Message -----
From: "Miller Puckette" <mpuckett at man104-1.ucsd.edu>
To: "David Sabine" <dave at davesabine.com>
Cc: <pd-list at iem.kug.ac.at>
Sent: Monday, June 24, 2002 1:59 PM
Subject: Re: [PD] Spigot Creation agruments?


> Hmm, maybe it would be best to avoid sending arguments to spigot in case
> I can figure out a good way to generalize it someday...  for the moment,
I'm
> thinking about offering a max-compatible "gate" such as already exists
> as an extern.
>
> cheers
> Miller
>
> On Mon, Jun 24, 2002 at 01:40:14PM -0600, David Sabine wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > [spigot] confuses me a little.  It seems that the only creation argument
that it accepts is a "zero".  However, "zero" is the default state for
spigot even without the creation argument?
> >
> > Would it make sense to re-write [spigot] to accept "0" or "1" as a
creation argument which could then effectively be used to define its default
state?
> >
> > Can somebody clarify this issue for me?
> >
> > Many thanks,
> > Dave Sabine
>