[PD] dealing with arguments and inlets

[Frank Barknecht]

Hallo,
Frank Barknecht hat gesagt: // Frank Barknecht wrote:

> Hans-Christoph Steiner hat gesagt: // Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
> 
> > The way I have been thinking is that the first inlet is the general  
> > inlet, and it can accept many types of messages.  Then the second inlet  
> > lines up with the first argument, the third inlet to the second  
> > argument, etc.   I think this is pretty clean and flexible, and I think  
> > it would be nice to have some kind of standard for this.
... 
> For example I can add a new "thing" to set remotely just by creating a
> [commun /thing $0] object inside an abstraction. Nothing more and no
> inlets are necessary to make this "/thing" read- and settable through
> the OSC-in/outlet. 

I just counted (with the help of "wc") how many [commun]'s are used in
rrad.pattseq.pd, the most complex RRADdical patch, and there are
exactly 80. It would require 80 arguments and 80 inlets to provide the
same functionality in a traditional way, that RRADical provides using
one inlet and one argument.

Ciao
-- 
 Frank Barknecht                 _ ______footils.org_ __goto10.org__