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

[brandon zeeb]

What I'm seeing here is basically there is no currently supported way in
vanilla pd to adjust GOP properties for a particular abstraction (not
globally)?  If so, this is rather upsetting :(

~Brandon

On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 3:11 AM, IOhannes m zmoelnig <zmoelnig at iem.at>wrote:

> 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 According to [namecanvas] help, this object is obsolete?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
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pd-list at iem.at mailing list
> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-list/attachments/20100930/5806a0ee/attachment.htm>