[PD] inlet and inlet~
czhenry at gmail.com
Tue May 6 17:09:22 CEST 2008
It piqued my curiousity this morning...
whether you could use $1 arguments in the name of an object. So, I
made a abstraction this morning called inle.pd and it works.
You can instatiate the abstraction as
I don't think this approach is at all useful, though.
On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 9:09 AM, Miller Puckette
<mpuckett at imusic1.ucsd.edu> wrote:
> No... I hope to figure out a good way to permit that. Meanwhile, there's
> also a bug in that inlet~ doesn't take numbers "correctly" (doesn't
> promote them to signals)
> On Tue, May 06, 2008 at 10:07:04AM -0400, Matt Barber wrote:
> > Hello,
> > Is there a way to make an abstraction that has one inlet that takes
> > both signal and control messages (like osc~, e.g., or fiddle~ which
> > gets audio and setting info, etc.)? It's part of the API for objects;
> > it seems to me there ought to be a way to do this with abstractions as
> > well. I'm envisioning an inlet object that splits signal and control
> > into two outlets which can be parsed from there. Something that uses
> > the signal and control values to do the same thing (as in osc~) might
> > be difficult to implement in an abstraction, but having signal and
> > optional settings messages go to the same inlet would add to the
> > abstraction-as-object nature of PD... does it exist?
> > Thanks,
> > Matt
> > _______________________________________________
> > PD-list at iem.at mailing list
> > UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
> PD-list at iem.at mailing list
> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
More information about the Pd-list