[PD] inlets, outlets, and dynamic patching

[Claude Heiland-Allen]

Matt Barber wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> Thanks for this.  Out of curiosity, what's the main difference between
> [loadbang] and [initbang] for use in abstractions (does [initbang] not
> send a bang when you open the abstraction file for editing but only
> when you load it in another file)?

[loadbang] fires after the abstraction is loaded and connected into the 
containing patch, so [loadbang]--[outlet] should work.

[initbang] fires after the abstraction is loaded but before connections 
are made in the containing patch, so you can create i/o-lets and have 
them still be connected.

> Also, the [namecanvas] helpfile says it is obsolete -- is it likely to
> disappear?

It's only "obsolete" because it's possible to crash pd if you use it 
incorrectly.  I think it'll stay if enough people use it :)

> Thanks,
> 
> Matt
> 
> 
> 
> On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 11:34 AM, Claude Heiland-Allen
> <claudiusmaximus at goto10.org> wrote:
>> [initbang]
>>  [namecanvas]
>>
>>  search pd-list / pd-dev for info, dunno if it exists yet.
>>
>>
>>  Matt Barber wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> Is it possible to send messages to (or within) a particular instance
>>> of an abstraction, in order to dynamically change the number of inlets
>>> and outlets, e.g.?  If so, where do you send the message?  If you send
>>> it to the name of the abstraction patch, it seems to change all
>>> instances.  As an example, imagine implementing something like [gate]
>>> as an abstraction.
>>>
>>> Thanks again,
>>>
>>> Matt
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> PD-list at iem.at mailing list
>>> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
>> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
>>