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

[Frank Barknecht]

Hallo,
Mathieu Bouchard hat gesagt: // Mathieu Bouchard wrote:

> >I just find the disappearing or changing meaning of "0" confusing.
> 
> What have you ever used that meaning for?

Well, for making sure, that unpack will give a number at that outlet
or nothing there at all.

I think, the usefulness, type-checking can have, is obvious, otherwise
we wouldn't have C. Of course, sometimes it's a pain, otherwise we
wouldn't have other languages.

But to illustrate where the type-checking of [unpack] is useful, see
attached patch: If I have an [unpack 0 0 0] in my patch, and after
that some math calculations on numbers, then if a symbol message
reaches the [unpack 0 0 0], for years now I *know* that the error in
my patch has to be somewhere before that unpack. This makes looking
for the bug a bit easier and I admit: I'm used to this behaviour of
unpack. 

Of course sometimes a type-less "unpack"-operation is useful as well,
but all I'm suggesting is that this should be made in a different
object like the proposed [list unpack] and not in [unpack] itself.
Your insistence on changing [unpack] itself is what I cannot
understand.

Bye
-- 
 Frank Barknecht                 _ ______footils.org_ __goto10.org__
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: unpackit.pd
Type: application/puredata
Size: 1226 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-list/attachments/20070722/a23e7b7e/attachment.bin>