[PD] namecanvas obsolete? Why? Re: Dynamic Graph on Parent
matju at artengine.ca
Fri Oct 1 14:44:20 CEST 2010
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
$-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
More information about the Pd-list