[PD] $0-abstraction question

[Liam Goodacre]

One solution is to give each abstraction instance its own ID number from within the patch, bypassing $0. Ie. if you do this:

[loadbang]
|
[value load] x [+ 1]
|
[s $0-my-number]

you will generate unique numbers (1, 2, 3...) for each instance, according to creation order.

Things get complicated here when you decide to delete one of the instances and then save the patch--all of the subsequent numbers will be off when you re-load. You can probably get around this by having them all re-calculate every time one is loaded.


> From: monologx at gmail.com
> Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2016 16:36:54 +0200
> To: pd-list at lists.iem.at
> Subject: [PD] $0-abstraction question
> 
> Dear List,
> 
> This is my first time writing here so please be gentle. :-)
> I'm working on a state saving system in vanilla for multiple instances of the same abstraction. I've got a good system up and running where I'm writing and reading to textfile using numerical creation arguments for the abstractions to separate the textfiles from each other. However, it would be a lot easier if the unique four digit $0 digits of the abstraction was saved with the .pd-file and not given a new number on re-booting the patch. There is probably a million scenarios where this behaviour would be not desired that I'm unaware of. But it would be nice to be able to skip giving the abstraction an argument on creation. 
> 
> All best / Johan
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Pd-list at lists.iem.at mailing list
> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-list/attachments/20160408/4516ce17/attachment.html>