[PD] [inlet], [outlet].

[Mathieu Bouchard]

On Wed, 7 May 2003, Krzysztof Czaja wrote:

> 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]?

well, using [print] I cannot see any difference, but using [rubyprint], I
can see one by sending a float both through [t a] and directly to
[rubyprint]:

[gf] float: [35.0]
[gf] list: [35.0]

so [t a] wraps the float in a one-element list, which makes a difference
to GridFlow, because it sees a float as a "scalar" (0-D grid) and a list
as a "vector" (1-D grid)

the same happens for symbol messages like [symbol foo( :

[gf] symbol: [:foo]
[gf] list: [:foo]

> 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...

Yeah, I never saw [inlet] with an argument. I don't really know much about
PD, so sometimes my ideas may look weird.

I asked for that not only as an attempt to make PD "cleaner" (in the sense
that object position should not have significant effect on the behaviour),
but also to improve compatibility with jMax. One of my .jmax files doesn't
convert to .pd _because_ of this. I guess I'm stuck with adding code to
the converter to reorder the positions of [inlet] objects anyway. This may
screw the layout but it's not like the layout of converted patches is not
already quite screwed.

________________________________________________________________
Mathieu Bouchard                       http://artengine.ca/matju