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

[Mathieu Bouchard]

On Thu, 30 Sep 2010, brandon zeeb wrote:

> With the example above, one could perform canvas operations on the 
> current canvas, ie: "this".  So to answer your question, $! would be the 
> equivalent to whatever name you supplied in [namecanvas], so it's type 
> would be that of the canvas, an object type.  

There's no atomtype for that.

A_SYMBOL can only refer to a t_symbol (a normal symbol entry), which 
contains the receive-symbol info, so, a unique receive-symbol has to be 
registered if you want to use that. I mean, it's very doable and easy to 
add an extra pd_bind to each canvas, that would be "$0-canvas" or 
"$0-this" or whatever, but it's another feature, and it's one that you 
have to add before adding $!, because the value of $! depends on it... and 
then you don't really need $! because you can write $0-canvas instead.

A_POINTER can only point to "scalars" and elements of "array", not to any 
objects.

$-substitution can only ever mean something that could theoretically have 
come out of an object : I mean that $-substitution first makes a new 
message, and THEN another part of pd looks at what it means. So, $! can't 
be too special, it has to rest upon other features of pd.

  _______________________________________________________________________
| Mathieu Bouchard ------------------------------ Villeray, Montréal, QC