[PD] [clone]'s instance number

Wed May 18 22:40:17 CEST 2016

>
>
>
> BTW: I guess, it's mostly a design question, whether to work with instance
> numbers inside abstractions and or to work with dispatching via the inlets
> and outlets. However, I can think of at least two cases where it's
> necessary to have immediate access to instance numbers inside an
> abstraction:
> a) [send~ foo-$1] or [catch~ bar-$1] to disambiguate audio inputs/outputs,
> because you can't set these two dynamically like [r~] and [throw~]
>

Where do you envision the corresponding [r~ foo-$1] or [throw~ bar-$1] to
reside? If it's in the same abstraction, then $0 ought to work just as
well.

> b) instantiate another abstraction by the instance number (nested
> abstractions)
>

Do you mean something like you have 1-baz.pd, 2-baz.pd, etc. and then
inside your [clone] abstraction you've got [$1-baz]? I suppose this is a
potential use case.

>
> So the current behaviour of [clone] (passing the instance number as $1)
> can be important and very useful. The alternative mode I proposed is mainly
> for convenience but I'm sure it would pay off in the long run!
>
> > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 18. Mai 2016 um 18:45 Uhr
> > Von: "Miller Puckette" <msp at ucsd.edu>
> > An: "Alex Norman" <x37v.alex 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
> >
> > OK... sounds like it's worth putting in.  I guess with the one-letter it
> > already takes (-s) I should also add something like a -e flag to put the
> > number argument at the end of the list instead of the beginning, or
> something
> > like that.
> >
> > cheers
> > Miller
> >
> > On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 07:20:29AM -0700, Alex Norman wrote:
> > > I see your point, the abstraction need not know it's instance number
> since only the messages meant for it would be dispatched to it.. If you
> don't care about using sends directed to a specific abstraction then the $1
> does nothing for you and if the flag to clone could ditch the $1 to
> instance setting and just set the arguments to the abstraction [clone -flag
> blah 20 1 2 3] makes 20 copies of blah with args $1=1 $2=2.. You could use
> more of your existing abstractions as is, using their args the same way
> with or without clone.
> > >
> > > I'm warming up to that idea.
> > >
> > > Alex
> > >
> > > On May 17, 2016 6:44:51 PM PDT, Christof Ressi <christof.ressi at gmx.at>
> wrote:
> > > >you can still disambiguate, because incoming messages are dispatched
> by
> > > >the instance number and outgoing messages are prepended with it!
> > > >
> > > >My suggestion was mainly concerning all abstractions that work with
> > > >inlets and outlets (as opposed to sends and receives), where you
> > > >basically pass a message and get something out. This could be
> anything,
> > > >from simple message filtering to a perlin noise generator. Or also
> > > >existing audio modules that work with a message inlet. If there was
> > > >such a flag, you could take any of these abstractions as they are,
> > > >control them separately by prepending the instance number and route
> the
> > > >message output (or use the sum of the audio output).
> > > >
> > > >I guess, people will use [clone] mainly for voice management for
> > > >synthesizers, granular synthesis, complicated nested patches etc., but
> > > >I also see a great potential for massive data generation by using
> > > >existing simple abstractions and cloning them.
> > > >
> > > >Personally, I have many abstractions I would like to use with [clone],
> > > >but either I'd have to rewrite them or make a wrapper abstraction.
> It's
> > > >not a big deal, it's just that an alternative forwarding mode would
> > > >provide some additional convenience (and could also encourage other
> > > >usages for [clone]).
> > > >
> > > >Anyway, I can totally live without this feature, but would be happy to
> > > >have it :-).
> > > >
> > > >> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 18. Mai 2016 um 02:35 Uhr
> > > >> Von: "Miller Puckette" <msp at ucsd.edu>
> > > >> An: "Christof Ressi" <christof.ressi at gmx.at>
> > > >> Cc: Pd-list <pd-list at lists.iem.at>
> > > >> Betreff: Re: [PD] [clone]'s instance number
> > > >>
> > > >> 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
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >_______________________________________________
> > > >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
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-list/attachments/20160518/0719284d/attachment-0001.html>