[PD] creation parameters to inlets/outlets for documentation?

[Phil Stone]

I should clarify this by adding that the side-effect won't happen if you 
edit an abstraction's inlets/outlets without any objects that include 
that abstraction being open at the time. Apparently, the change causes a 
re-instantiation of the abstraction in the parent, breaking the 
inlet/outlet connections.


On 6/19/12 1:22 PM, Phil Stone wrote:
> One potentially nasty drawback to this practice (I found) was that if 
> you change the pseudo-argument in any way, you lose whatever 
> connections were made to that inlet or outlet in the outer patch. I 
> agree with you that comments are a pain in the neck, but at least they 
> don't exhibit this often hard-to-find side effect.
>
>
> Phil
> www.pkstonemusic.com
>
>
>
> On 6/19/12 12:41 PM, Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote:
>> quick question: is it legal to (ab)use creation parameters to inlets 
>> and outlets for documentation, or does that lead to unwanted side 
>> effects?
>>
>> i'd like to do something like this:
>>
>> [inlet Set level in dB]
>> [inlet Set Fader position in mm]
>>
>> [outlet Current level in dB]
>> [outlet Current Fader position in mm]
>> [outlet~ Gain coefficient]
>>
>> of course i could use comments, but i don't like the way they don't 
>> line-wrap in a controlled way, plus their association to what they 
>> are annotating is a bit weak for my taste...
>>
>> best,
>>
>>
>> jörn
>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pd-list at iem.at mailing list
> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> 
> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list