[PD] dynamic-named arrays

[Mathieu Bouchard]

On Fri, 3 Oct 2003, Thomas Grill wrote:

> i program quite a lot (either with programming languages and
> patcher-like systems) and it's my experience that one often needs to
> do quick and dirty things instead of taking the time to design a
> reusable module. I find my project folders cluttered with abstractions
> that i just needed to encapsule a part of a patch - i think i'm more a
> supporter of self-consistency. I don't say that there is a real
> necessity for subpatcher arguments but it's probably another level of
> flexibility.

Instead of subpatcher arguments, I would propose "subabstractions". This
is like most programming languages, where the concept of subprogram is
distinct from the one of file. In that case, you can make abstractions
local to a patch, which means you need a menu to access them.

The current design can still be excused by pointing at jMax, C74-Max,
Matlab, etc. which don't distinguish subprograms from files either.
But I'd like my idea to be judged for what it is. (I already talked of
that idea here, with mixed results...)

Btw, given enough subpatches, PD's policy of automatically opening all of
them is sort of annoying. I prefer the jMax behaviour, which is to only
show the top level by default.

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