[PD] Finding "$0" and dealing with it in messages

[Roman Haefeli]

Am 25.11.09 09:48 schrieb "Frank Barknecht" unter <fbar at footils.org>:

> Hallo,
> Hans-Christoph Steiner hat gesagt: // Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
> 
>>> Regarding all_about_data_types.pd: Personally I wouldn't trust this
>>> patch.
>> 
>> 
>> Its a patch with examples, if you don't trust the examples, then that
>> seems to mean you don't trust Pd ;)
> 
> To me the fundamental flaw of the data types patch is that it tries to infer
> information about Pd's "data types" from the behaviour of selected objects,
> but
> doesn't explain the underlying mechanisms.
> 
> Single objects unfortunatly often behave inconsistently  or not as one maybe
> would expect (e.g. [route list symbol] strips list- but not symbol-selectors).
> IMO an explanation of the mechanisms is imporant to understand, where or why
> objects behave "strange". all_about_data_types.pd doesn't even use the word
> "selector" anywhere. Instead it talks about "casting" but doesn't explain what
> that means (in the patch it means adding a "symbol"-selector to a
> meta-message).
> It has several vague sentences in it like: "Many objects cast the data they
> receive when they output it" or "Some objects do not cast the data".  This
> doesn't make me any smarter.

I wonder, what makes one any smarter. It doesn't make you any smarter, when
knowing about all the underlying mechanisms and special cases of Pd, it only
makes you know more. However, it *would* you make smarter, if you would be
able to apply your current experiences on new cases, that you haven't
experienced before, for instance: you found, that [route] strips the
selector off the message 'list one two' and 'hallo velo', so that you would
naturally assume, that [route] would strip off any selector. However, it
doesn't,  which makes you have to learn every single case separately.
Smartness doesn't help here, only diligence. Unfortunately, when it comes to
Pd data types, smartness doesn't apply. So we're left with documenting
all_(the special cases)_about_data_types(.pd).

If there are things two say about some the of the (special or not) cases,
wouldn't it be a good idea to simply add them? Generally i think, that
having such a patch isn't a bad idea, since it helps one not to have to find
all the cases by experience.

roman





		
___________________________________________________________ 
Telefonate ohne weitere Kosten vom PC zum PC: http://messenger.yahoo.de