[PD] [PD-announce] the end of type restrictions
Thomas O Fredericks
tof at danslchamp.org
Sat Jul 21 14:26:19 CEST 2007
In what case do you rely on using [unpack 0 0 0] except for throwing an
error when it receives a symbol? As it was previously suggested on this
list, why use anything else than [t a] or [t b]? I think Mathieu's end of
type restrictions is a great idea. For example, if you use Max/Msp every so
often, you regularly curse at the useless int/float type restriction.
Mathieu, you would only need to create a new object that would determine the
type of the data (unless your new [route] still does this). For example, I
sometimes use [route bang list symbol] to parse data by its type when an
abstraction has many different "functions" attached to the same inlet.
thomas ouellet fredericks, tof at danslchamp.org, montreal, canada
On 7/21/07, Frank Barknecht <fbar at footils.org> wrote:
> Mathieu Bouchard hat gesagt: // Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
> > http://artengine.ca/desiredata/gallery/unpack-mixed.png
> Oh, that last one is tricky IMO. Even when you obviously don't care
> about patch compatibility to other Pds anymore, making [unpack 0 0 0]
> behave as you suggest may break even old patches and abstractions,
> that rely on nothing else than a float getting through a 0 in
> "unpack". Why don't you use [unpack a a a] like in trigger?
> Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org_ __goto10.org__
> PD-list at iem.at mailing list
> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Pd-list