[PD] [bug?] loadbanging with "-noloadbang"

Miller Puckette msp at ucsd.edu
Wed May 10 21:20:05 CEST 2017

I never thought about it - my original intent in -noloadbang was to allow one
to open a patch that might be crashing Pd somehow because of a loadbang
action (such as a batch process that automatically exits after a fixed time).

I'm not sure what the correct behavior should be.


On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 08:47:51PM +0200, IOhannes m zmölnig wrote:
> i just discovered, that a [loadbang] can trigger even if Pd is started
> with "-noloadbang".
> 1.) create an abstraction myloadbang.pd
> [loadbang]
> |
> [print $0-loadbanged]
> 2.) create a patch that contains (only) a [myloadbang] object, save it
> as "myloadbang-test.pd"
> 3.) start Pd with "pd -noloadbang myloadbang-test.pd"
> 3a.) observe that the loadbang is suppressed (as there is no
> "1004-loadbanged: bang" printout)
> 4.) in the myloadbang-test.pd patch, create a new instance of [myloadbang].
> 4a) observe that the instance does get loadbanged (the Pd-console shows
> "1005-loadbanged: bang")
> is this intended behaviour? (I don't have a string opinion either way;
> but i wonder...).
> gfmasdr
> IOhannes

> _______________________________________________
> Pd-list at lists.iem.at mailing list
> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

More information about the Pd-list mailing list