[PD] clone vs. dynamic patching

[Christof Ressi]

> Two abstractions a and b for example, with the output of a connected to b and b connected to [clone]s outlet,
> rather than having parallel copies of one abstraction...?

You can do this with [send~]/[receive~]: each abstraction could have a [receive~] based on its instance number, e.g. [r~ /foo/$1], and also a [send~] which you can route to wherever you want, e.g. to the next instance:

[loadbang] -> [f $1] -> [+ 1] -> [set /foo/$1( -> [send~]

You can feed a signal into [clone] with [send~ /foo/0] and in the last instance you can send the signal to a [receive~] outside of clone. Alternatively, only the first instance could read from the [inlet~] and only the last instance could write to the [outlet~] by using [*~]. You can pass the total number of instances, so each instance knows whether it's the last one.

Christof


Gesendet: Samstag, 18. Januar 2020 um 18:30 Uhr
Von: "tim vets" <timvets at gmail.com>
An: Pd-List <pd-list at lists.iem.at>
Betreff: Re: [PD] clone vs. dynamic patching

  

Op za 18 jan. 2020 om 18:03 schreef Christof Ressi <christof.ressi at gmx.at[mailto:christof.ressi at gmx.at]>: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.
 
Is there a way to make other kinds of structures inside [clone] though?
Two abstractions a and b for example, with the output of a connected to b and b connected to [clone]s outlet,
rather than having parallel copies of one abstraction...?
 
 > 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[mailto:oliver at klingt.org]>
> An: Pd-List <pd-list at lists.iem.at[mailto: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[mailto: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[mailto: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[https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list]