[PD] select backward compatibility

[Hans-Christoph Steiner]

This is definitely a thing that can cause confusion, that's why I  
think it should be consistent throughout.  So one of these is  
probably wrong:


      [list(
       |
[select]

(no method for 'list')



[list(
|
[print]

(no method for 'bang')



I don't have a clear idea of which is right, but I do think that they  
should give the same error.

.hc



On Sep 5, 2007, at 8:05 PM, Miller Puckette wrote:

> Supposedly, "list" and "bang" are identical.  I think the right way to
> print an empty list is to print "bang".  But then again, if you're  
> asked
> what the selector is, I suppose it could be legitimately described as
> either 'list' or 'bang' - each carries a risk of confusion.
>
> cheers
> Miller
>
> On Thu, Sep 06, 2007 at 01:50:36AM +0200, Roman Haefeli wrote:
>> On Wed, 2007-09-05 at 19:19 -0400, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
>>>  If [list( is equal to [bang( then it always needs to be equal
>>> to [bang(.  Right now, it is only sometimes equal to [bang(
>>
>> have you already tried this:
>>
>> [list(
>> |
>> [print]
>>
>> pd-window says: 'print: bang' . i admit, i didn't know that  
>> before, but
>> it seems somehow consistent, that an empty list is equal to  
>> 'bang'. do
>> you know a case, where it is handled differently?
>>
>> roman
>>
>>
>> 	
>> 		
>> ___________________________________________________________
>> Der fr?he Vogel f?ngt den Wurm. Hier gelangen Sie zum neuen Yahoo!  
>> Mail: http://mail.yahoo.de
>>
>>
>
>> _______________________________________________
>> PD-list at iem.at mailing list
>> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/ 
>> listinfo/pd-list



------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
----

If you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem.