[PD] bang vs empty list

[Ivica Ico Bukvic]

I wonder if we could as part of the setup call for each external somehow
infer default behaviors for each object e.g.: 

something_bang() {
	Error("this inlet does not support bang message\n");
}
etc.

Then if that particular object has another addmethod after it referencing
its own genuine bang (or whatever) method, such call would override the
original. I am just not sure if this is possible in the first place and
whether that could produce some misleading messages as well (e.g. I just
fixed cxc/ascseq crash when receiving a bang but this was solved without
having the bang function--this may be fixed by the aforesaid approach as
long as this is somehow possible as part of the setup function and without
having to manually alter every single external's setup function and assuming
that bang function will take precedence over the anything function).

Thoughts?


> -----Original Message-----
> From: pd-list-bounces at iem.at [mailto:pd-list-bounces at iem.at] On Behalf Of
> Jonathan Wilkes
> Sent: Monday, February 25, 2013 8:18 PM
> To: pd-list
> Subject: [PD] bang vs empty list
> 
> Seems like for any object that doesn't have a bang method nor list method,
> an empty list silently gets discarded.
> 
> compare
> 
> [bang(
> |
> [sin]
> 
> to
> 
> [list(
> |
> [sin]
> 
> or, more likely
> 
> [bang(
> 
> |
> [t a]
> |
> [sin]
> 
> Same for [select] and many others.
> 
> Is there a way to fix this?
> 
> -Jonathan
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Pd-list at iem.at mailing list
> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list