[PD] abstractions which have their own memory

[padawan12]

Arrays are not the best thing to use for data
persistence. Messages constructed using "set"
and then textfiles are preferable.
Alexandre Quessy just posted a method yesterday
that implements a per patch memory. You might like
to study the "bag'o'tricks" GOP abstractions to see
another effective example of doing this.


On Tue, 4 Jul 2006 17:43:54 +0300
sokratesla <ugurguney at gmail.com> wrote:

> # Hi everybody!
> # I tried to build an abstraction which remembers its previous state before
> closing the patch. I put an array in the abstraction with its "save
> contents" option checked and saved the state of the abstraction in this
> array of which name starts with $0- in order to make each table unique. A
> [loadbang] outputs the values stored in the array.
> # But this doesn't seems to work. I made an example of this structure.
> abswmem.pd is a very simple abstraction, and test.abswmem.pd have two of
> them. After giving the arrays of the abstractions different values, saving
> the patch, closing it, and loading again. Nothing happens :-) The values
> aren't stored in the arrays.
> # And I see the ambiguity. There is only one .pd file for the abstraction,
> so, only one file for storing the values of the array. Which abstraction
> object's array will be saved etc?
> 
> # Can anybody help with these?
> -ugur guney-
>