[PD] [inlet], [outlet].

[pix]

the more i think about it, the more i become a fan of the existing way of
doing things ;)

the importance of horizontal order makes it easier to see which connection
points on the object correspond to which [inlets] in the patch. with
numbered inlet, this would just become a convention, and would make for
some needlessly hard to understand patches.

if you are dynamically generating patches and don't want to worry about
display (so most objects are created at 0,0), perhaps just put the number
that you would have put as a parameter to [inlet] in the x value of the
object. eg, inlet 1 is drawn at 1,0 and inlet 2 is drawn at 2,0 etc.

pix.

On Wed, 07 May 2003 11:07:01 +0200
Krzysztof Czaja <czaja at chopin.edu.pl> wrote:

> hi Mathieu,
> 
> is it just my false impression, that the bang is the only message
> mangled by [t a]?  I have always considered this to be a bug
> (reported...)
> 
> So, are there other messages converted by [t a]?
> 
> Btw, I do see the point in your quest for (optionally) numbered
> inlets/outlets.  The specialized subpatchers of msp have
> numbered in/outs, while the regular subpatchers have unnumbered
> inlets/outlets.  People, even if confused at first, easily come
> to terms with using both ways in their work.
> 
> But how to make them into Pd without breaking other things, is
> quite another matter...
> 
> Krzysztof
> 
> Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
>  > About trigger. I actually prefer [fork], as it only orders messages
>  > and nothing else, while [t a a] mangles a certain number of messages:
>  > for example, bang gets transformed into a list containing a single
>  > element 0.0???
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> PD-list mailing list
> PD-list at iem.kug.ac.at
> http://iem.kug.ac.at/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pd-list