[PD] Bug Report/Feature Request: trigger should work like pack
Alexandre Torres Porres
porres at gmail.com
Mon Apr 15 07:13:42 CEST 2019
I agree [t b f l s 55] is rather messed up, but the usual use case is
[t b b f b] or [[t b l] or [t a b] or [t b s b] - you get it, mixing
message types with bangs. I know I do this all the time and perhaps you do
Just because you can do crazy and unreasonable things, it doesn't mean the
object was designed for that.
And now we have a request to also include constant values, which can add
even more arbitrary and unreasonable possibilities, like in your example
with t b f l s *55*]...
I think there's an use case to initialize a patch and not need to have [t b
b b] and then connect the bang outputs to symbols and floats. So I can see
how it can be convenient.
Em seg, 15 de abr de 2019 às 01:33, William Huston <williamahuston at gmail.com>
> Let's decouple that overloaded trigger into more rational objects
> bang-only trigger
> List replicator/sequencer
> symbol replicator / sequencer.
> deprecate existing trigger.
Like I said, trigger is mostly used not as a bang only, but also mixing
with other message types. So I don't see how it would get deprecated. I
also don't see why creating several other objects since the trigger object
already does that.
I think your problems with trigger is that you haven't really gotten it
yet, it's actually a simple and quite versatile object. But simplicity can
lead to versatileness, but that doesn't have to be confused with being
complex and weird.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Pd-list