[PD] [PD-announce] the end of type restrictions

[Thomas O Fredericks]

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:
>
> Hallo,
> 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?
>
> Ciao
> --
> Frank Barknecht                 _ ______footils.org_ __goto10.org__
>
> _______________________________________________
> PD-list at iem.at mailing list
> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-list/attachments/20070721/99b9c53b/attachment.htm>