[PD] clone vs. dynamic patching

[Christof Ressi]

I always use [clone] when I need several instances of an abstraction. Dynamic patching is a hack and shouldn't be used anymore for this purpose.

> one feature badly missing is the possibility ta allocate dynamic "voice" 
> (or "instance") numbers (i.e. how many instances of an abstraction are 
> created).

That would be useful and it's actually on my to-do-list :-). But usually I just allocate the max. number of instances I need and simply "disable" instances I don't need. I think this is generally the better approach for cloned DSP objects (using [switch~], because dynamically changing the number of voices wouldn't be realtime safe anyway...

Christof

> Gesendet: Samstag, 18. Januar 2020 um 16:46 Uhr
> Von: "oliver" <oliver at klingt.org>
> An: Pd-List <pd-list at lists.iem.at>
> Betreff: Re: [PD] clone vs. dynamic patching
>
> João Pais wrote:
> > Hello list,
> > 
> > I didn't try clone yet, I always worked with dynamic patching for 
> > similar issues. For those who are knowledgeable, I would like to ask: is 
> > there any advantage of clone against dynamic patching when using the 
> > same circuit, or is it the same?
> > This pertains to patches working on both control and signal input/output.
> > 
> 
> if you are familiar with MAX:
> 
> [clone] is nearly the same as [poly~]
> 
> one feature badly missing is the possibility ta allocate dynamic "voice" 
> (or "instance") numbers (i.e. how many instances of an abstraction are 
> created). i hope miller has plans to implement this in the future.
> 
> right now, all you can do is a combination of using [clone] and dynamic 
> patching if you want to change the number of instances on the fly 
> (destroy the old clone object and re-create it with new arguments with 
> PD messages).
> 
> i used [clone] on several occasions and find it extremely useful, as you 
> can directly edit the original source and see the results (as opposed to 
> MAX).
> 
> i would say the best use case is a situation, where you need let's say 
> 10 or more copies of a patch (i.e. for parameter organisation, 
> oscillator banks etc...). basically it's the same as creating multiple 
> abstractions where you do the message routing internally with a creation 
> argument
> 
> [abs 1]
> [abs 2]
> [abs 3]
> [abs 4] etc...
> 
> so, no - there's no direct ADVANTAGE over dynamic patching but in 
> general i think it's the better and clearer concept
> 
> best
> 
> oliver
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Pd-list at lists.iem.at mailing list
> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
>