[PD] inlet numbering

[Josh Steiner]

Martin Peach wrote:

> Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
>
>> which one is the best, counting the leftmost inlet as #0, or counting it
>> as #1 ? I ask because I have quite a bit of doc and code in which inlets
>> are numbered, so before there's too much of it, i'd like to settle this
>> issue.
>>
>> so i'm looking to know what would be the advantages of doing it one 
>> way or
>> another, and also, who standardized on calling it #0, and who instead
>> chose #1.
>
>
> By analogy with the 'main' function in c, where argv[0] points to the 
> full pathname of the program, it would be interesting in pd if inlet 0 
> were to be reserved for a unique pathname to the object (such as a 
> 'globally unique identifier' or the pointer to the object's own 
> struct), allowing it to be targeted by other objects just like a 
> [send]/[receive] pair. Then the visible inlets would be numbered from 1.
> Outlet 0 would emit the value of inlet 0.
>

interesting idea.  plus elseware in pd you start counting from 1, namely 
[$1] is the first argument to an abstraction, not [$0]


-- 
________________________________________________________________
live experimental electronic music   --   http://bluevitriol.com
independent u.s. drum'n'bass         --   http://vitriolix.com