[PD] settable receive again
ch at chnry.net
Sat Jun 9 13:08:37 CEST 2012
Le 08/06/2012 19:15, Jonathan Wilkes a écrit :
>> anyway, if you really in need for a settable send and a settable receive, you
>> can always use prepends and route that are both settable.
>> see small attached abstraction.
> I think you are stuck for two reasons
> 1) [r setable_send_receive] is global. I want the parent $0 in front of it so that
> my abstraction symbols don't clash with other abstractions.
i don't understand this point : just ignore the settable_send_receive stuff that is hidden inside ss and sr.
this 2 abstractions work exactly like a real settable send and receive, at least for the local / global send.
i.e. if you want a local only send/receive, just use $0-bla, like you would have done with "real" send / receive.
that the route that filter content of different abstraction. the only problem is CPU overload, but that should really be minor.
> 2) Your example filters messages in a way that s/r doesn't. It's possible to hack
> around this using three extra objects.
yes, right. but that is a minor problem. not a show stopper.
> It is also possible to get the arguments of
> an abstraction in Pd Vanilla. With the former, I'd rather send a single message to
> an inlet and be done.
More information about the Pd-list