[PD] [clone]'s instance number

Wed May 18 02:35:21 CEST 2016

I'm not sure... would anyone ever use this feature?  The patch in question
would ahve to take arguments (if not, thre's no problem) but not use them to
disambiguate the instances (because clone will set them all equal anyway).
I have trouble imaginig anyone building a patch like that.

cheers
Miller

On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 12:54:16AM +0200, Christof Ressi wrote:
> What do you think about the idea with a flag for changing the way creation arguments are forwarded? It would be really handy if you could write something like
> [clone -flag 100 my-abstraction 5 6 7] and $1 $2 $3 will be substituted by 5 6 7 instead of [N] 5 6. This way you could use existing abstractions as they are, without the need for writing a wrapper abstraction to handle the creation argument forwarding.
> 
> Christof
> 
> > Gesendet: Dienstag, 17. Mai 2016 um 04:05 Uhr
> > Von: "Miller Puckette" <msp at ucsd.edu>
> > An: "Jaime Oliver" <jaime.oliver2 at gmail.com>
> > Cc: "Christof Ressi" <christof.ressi at gmx.at>, Pd-list <pd-list at lists.iem.at>
> > Betreff: Re: [PD] [clone]'s instance number
> >
> > Cool, taking this suggestion.  At least for now it will work either way,
> > but it's much more readable with the abstraction name first so I changed the
> > help file to invoke it that way.
> > 
> > cheers
> > Miller
> > 
> > On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 01:13:37PM -0400, Jaime Oliver wrote:
> > > Well, 
> > > 
> > > What would happen if instead of calling clone like:
> > > 
> > > [clone 16 my-abstraction 1 5 9]
> > > 
> > > we called it with:
> > > 
> > > [clone my-abstraction 16 1 5 9]
> > > 
> > > and then $1 seems quite appropriate.
> > > 
> > > ?
> > > 
> > > J
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > > On May 11, 2016, at 12:17 PM, Christof Ressi <christof.ressi at gmx.at> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > I agree that $1 is most natural!
> > > > 
> > > > However, what about adding an additional flag -foo for [clone], which changes the way creation arguments are parsed?
> > > > Passing -foo could ignore the object ID and rather forward creation arguments just as they are.
> > > > 
> > > > This wouldn't break the current behaviour of [clone], but provide some functionality to deal with ordinary abstractions more conveniently.
> > > > 
> > > > Christof
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > >  
> > > >  
> > > > 
> > > > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 11. Mai 2016 um 18:06 Uhr
> > > > Von: "Ivica Bukvic" <ico at vt.edu>
> > > > An: "Miller Puckette" <msp at ucsd.edu>
> > > > Cc: "IOhannes m zmoelnig" <zmoelnig at iem.at>, Pd-list <pd-list at lists.iem.at>, "Christof Ressi" <christof.ressi at gmx.at>
> > > > Betreff: Re: [PD] [clone]'s instance number
> > > > What about having an if statement that detects clone object and if so, compensates for $2 discrepancy and assigns $1 to it instead and increments from there? This way the discrepancy is internalized as opposed to something user needs to deal with.
> > > > -- 
> > > > Ivica Ico Bukvic, D.M.A.
> > > > Associate Professor
> > > > Computer Music
> > > > ICAT Senior Fellow
> > > > Director -- DISIS, L2Ork
> > > > Virginia Tech
> > > > School of Performing Arts – 0141
> > > > Blacksburg, VA 24061
> > > > (540) 231-6139
> > > > ico at vt.edu
> > > > www.performingarts.vt.edu[http://www.performingarts.vt.edu]
> > > > disis.icat.vt.edu[http://disis.icat.vt.edu]
> > > > l2ork.icat.vt.edu[http://l2ork.icat.vt.edu]
> > > > ico.bukvic.net[http://ico.bukvic.net]
> > > > 
> > > > On May 11, 2016 11:50, "Miller Puckette" <msp at ucsd.edu[msp at ucsd.edu]> wrote:I gave this some thought but couldn't come up with anything more natural than
> > > > the "$1" idea.  It allows for changing the other arguments more easily than
> > > > it would have been if the instance number were passed last.  Also, somehow
> > > > it felt more natural to have the instance number first.
> > > > 
> > > > If there's interest in the idea, I could add arrguments to change the
> > > > behavior (such as putting $1 last instead of first)...  Offhand I doubt that
> > > > would get used much though.
> > > > 
> > > > cheers
> > > > Miller
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 05:26:21PM +0200, Christof Ressi wrote:
> > > >> There's also a pitfall: additional creation arguments for the cloned abstraction will start with $2.
> > > >> For example, in [clone 16 my-abstraction 1 5 9] '1' will be parsed as $2, '5' as $3, '9' as $4 etc.
> > > >> No problem, if the abstraction was written for being used with [clone], but bad when cloning existing abstractions.
> > > >> 
> > > >> I'm wondering if there could be a way to get the abstraction ID without messing up existing abstractions... Maybe have a dedicated object?
> > > >> 
> > > >> For now, I think it's important to mention the parsing of additional creation arguments in the help file.
> > > >> 
> > > >> Christof
> > > >> 
> > > >>> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 11. Mai 2016 um 16:25 Uhr
> > > >>> Von: "IOhannes m zmoelnig" <zmoelnig at iem.at[zmoelnig at iem.at]>
> > > >>> An: pd-list at lists.iem.at[pd-list at lists.iem.at]
> > > >>> Betreff: Re: [PD] [clone]'s instance number
> > > >>> 
> > > >>> On 2016-05-11 16:18, Liam Goodacre wrote:
> > > >>>> Would it be possible to access [clone]'s unique instance number from within the patch, a bit like a creation argument? This could be used to achieve differentiation between the abstractions, ie. if the abstraction contains "tabread4~ $-1.array" and the $-1 is replaced with the instance number, then each instance could read a different file. Of course there are other ways of doing this, but it would be neat to do it with clone, and I'm wondering if there's a way.
> > > >>> 
> > > >>> 
> > > >>> isn't this what $1 is already doing in clone's instances?
> > > >>> 
> > > >>> 
> > > >>> fgasdmr
> > > >>> IOhannes
> > > >>> 
> > > >>> _______________________________________________
> > > >>> Pd-list at lists.iem.at[Pd-list at lists.iem.at] mailing list
> > > >>> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list[https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list]
> > > >>> 
> > > >> 
> > > >> _______________________________________________
> > > >> Pd-list at lists.iem.at[Pd-list at lists.iem.at] mailing list
> > > >> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list[https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list]
> > > > 
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Pd-list at lists.iem.at[Pd-list at lists.iem.at] mailing list
> > > > UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list[https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list]
> > > > 
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Pd-list at lists.iem.at mailing list
> > > > UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
> > > 
> > > 
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Pd-list at lists.iem.at mailing list
> > > UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Pd-list at lists.iem.at mailing list
> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list