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

Stephen Sinclair radarsat1 at gmail.com
Sun Jul 22 17:25:12 CEST 2007

> Actually a thought occured to me: If the arguments of [unpack] should
> not also specify their types, why do we have these arguments at all?
> As I see it, then they would only be there to specify the number of
> outlets. However using the argument count to specify the outlet count
> is really awkward IMO, a much better approach (especially when used
> with abstraction arguments) for this would be to use a number directly
> to specify the outlet count.

I know what you're saying, and I just had to reply: I would not be surprised
if the reason it was chosen to use the argument count was simply to ensure
that the graphical box was large enough to support the number of specified

That said, I bet it wouldn't be too difficult to create a new object that
behaves as you describe.  Maybe call it "explode".  :)

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-list/attachments/20070722/b9aafde8/attachment.htm>

More information about the Pd-list mailing list