[PD] pd+makeup

Mathieu Bouchard matju at sympatico.ca
Wed Feb 18 02:40:26 CET 2004

On Tue, 17 Feb 2004, Matthew Nish-Lapidus wrote:

> I might be alone in this.. but i think that segmented patch cords just
> lead to sloppy patches...  it makes them harder to read and much more
> convoluted..

Sigh. It's déjà vu all over again!!!

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 19:30:18 -0400 (EDT)
From: Mathieu Bouchard <matju at sympatico.ca>
To: ben at ekran.org
Cc: ivan.franco at ydreams.com, pd-list at iem.at
Subject: Re: [PD] 0.37 must 'Cut' cables?

On Fri, 12 Sep 2003 ben at ekran.org wrote:

> But I suppose the lesson is patches will never be hard to follow
> (either way) if they are well constructed! PD patches that are well
> constructed look good, segmented patch cords make bad patches look
> good...

You'd have a problem with my patches maybe? My work is essentially based
on recursion, so in almost every patch I have a wire that goes on top on
an object box, and doesn't have the possibility not to. That's not
beautiful. (Oh yeah, I could use "send" and "receive", but it makes the
diagram heavier.)

If you agree that having cords run over objects is ugly, could you tell me
what I'm supposed to do to beautify patches that use recursion?

Also, I don't recall any other arguments against segmented patch cords
than things along the lines of "if your patches didn't suck you wouldn't
care for that feature". So I'm not sure what I am supposed to tell
beginners about it without sounding bad. Are there any other arguments

Mathieu Bouchard                       http://artengine.ca/matju

More information about the Pd-list mailing list