[PD] namecanvas obsolete? Why? Re: Dynamic Graph on Parent

[IOhannes m zmoelnig]

On 2010-09-30 09:02, brandon zeeb wrote:
> According to [namecanvas] help, this object is obsolete?  How else can one
> send a message to one and only one abstraction without using namecanvas?  Is
> there the concept of 'this'?

"iemguts" kind of introduces a concept of "this".
most of the objects work on either "this" or "parent of this" or some
other "direct ancestor of this".

otoh, pd itself never actively supported dynamic patching.


iirc, the reason for obsoleting [namecanvas] is that it allows the
dynamic patching engine to get into an inconsistent (probably crashing)
state (true, there are other things that allow this as well, without
getting obsoleted).

anyhow, [namecanvas] has no concept of "this" either.

fgmadsr
IOhannes

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 3636 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-list/attachments/20100930/88c63f7c/attachment-0001.bin>