[PD] tabwriteat~ object

Miller Puckette mpuckett at imusic1.ucsd.edu
Tue Aug 4 17:01:56 CEST 2009

...or how about 'tabpoke~ ?  That would suggest putting in one value at a time
instead of shoveling them in en masse.


On Tue, Aug 04, 2009 at 03:21:55PM +0200, Frank Barknecht wrote:
> Hallo,
> Charles Henry hat gesagt: // Charles Henry wrote:
> > Doesn't tabwrite~ have a second inlet to set the name of the array
> > (It's been awhile)?  If so, then what harm could there be in
> > re-writing the object with 3 inlets?  Would it break something?
> It just has one inlet, you change the table to set with "set NAME" messages into
> the first inlet.
> So, yes, adding a second inlet should not change anything there. But it gets a
> bit tricky later on: How should you deal with a [bang( message that goes into
> the first inlet when there's something connected to the new audio-index inlet?
> There is a conflict of interest, which IMO is better solved with a new object.
> Actually I like the name [tabfeed~], as it somehow describes, that with audio
> index inlets you kind of constantly feed data into the table.
> Ciao
> -- 
> Frank
> _______________________________________________
> Pd-list at iem.at mailing list
> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

More information about the Pd-list mailing list