[PD] (breaking symbols) was Re: find a list of numbers in a text file

Martin Peach martin.peach at sympatico.ca
Sat Sep 10 20:19:49 CEST 2011

On 2011-09-10 13:46, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
> On Sat, 10 Sep 2011, Martin Peach wrote:
>>> Which other ways are you thinking about, apart from something that
>>> behaves more or less like strtof ?
>> OK, for example an object that converts names of numbers to floats:
>> or binary to float:
>> or imaginary numbers:
>> or even some kind of [expr] that takes symbolic input:
>> None of the above would work properly with a default symbol-to-float
>> method. Each needs to parse its input according to its own specific
>> meaning-space.
> So what's the problem with having an implicit cast that does the strtof
> that people want in 99,99 % of the cases, and still be able to use
> explicit means to convert things like MCMLXXVIII to float in whichever
> way you like ?


> It's not about all-encompassing conversions, it's about defaults.

If you say so. I was just saying that the default should avoid the 
all-encompassing conversion and not try second-guessing the users' 
intentions. It's probably safe to have Pd convert a symbol to a float by 
default iff there is no symbol method and there is a float method.
Trying to interpret every possible string as a float would add huge 
amount of bloat and delay to core Pd.


More information about the Pd-list mailing list