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

Mathieu Bouchard matju at artengine.ca
Sun Jul 22 21:41:02 CEST 2007

On Sun, 22 Jul 2007, Frank Barknecht wrote:

> 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?
> So instead of [unpack 0 0 0] an [unpack 3] would create an unpack with
> 3 outlets for any kind of atom. But as this of course is damn
> incompatible with old patches, a new class name should be used.

I have no idea why pd is like that, except that it conveniently enlarges 
the box as a way to compensate for the problem that the size of the object 
box isn't taking the number of in/outlets in advance. (DesireData ensures 
that the box is wide enough, by looking at the number of in/outlets)

I agree that changing the behaviour of pd's unpack to be like jmax's, is 
going to be damn incompatible.

> A candidate for this would be an "unpack method" for [list] like [list 
> unpack 3].

So far I agree about [list unpack 3].

  _ _ __ ___ _____ ________ _____________ _____________________ ...
| Mathieu Bouchard - tél:+1.514.383.3801, Montréal QC Canada

More information about the Pd-list mailing list