[PD] Pass arg to Pd via terminal

[Christof Ressi]

I'm not really against "-args", though, I'm just trying to look for 
something less ugly. It definitely is the most foolproof solution so far.

Anway, I think it should only apply to a *single* patch. This raises the 
question how to deal with patches passed as "regular" arguments...

You say we shouldn't do the following:

pd -args "1 2 3" patch1.pd -args "foo bar" patch2.pd

So only allow it for patches opened with "-open"?

pd -args "1 2 3" -open patch1.pd -args "foo bar" -open patch2.pd

Christof

On 09.06.2020 18:30, Christof Ressi wrote:
>
>> yes, sure.
> Your last e-mail indicated otherwise. You showed how you can't open 
> "mypatch.pd" as "mypatch", but this was not what Mario was asking.
>> but what's the point of this discussion?
> I just answered a question and you said my answer was wrong.
>
>> how is being able to open a file with an arbitrary name (including
>> arbitrary extensions) related to passing args to Pd?
> I've never claimed it was.
>
>> it seems that all ideas just fail the
>> "foolproof test".
> True.
>
> On the other hand, let's look at this:
>
> pd "mypatch.pd 1 2 3"
>
> What if we simply treat ".pd " as the delimiter? How many people 
> realistically have this character sequence in a directory name? I know 
> it's not 100% foolproof, but maybe it's good enough... Just sayin'
>
> Christof
>
> On 09.06.2020 17:50, IOhannes m zmölnig wrote:
>> On 2020-06-09 17:34, Christof Ressi wrote:
>>> Just to be clear: we're talking about opening a patch file that does not
>>> have the .pd extension, e.g. "mypatch.txt" or simply "mypatch". This
>>> certainly works (at least here on Windows.)
>> yes, sure. that's what i wrote in my other mail.
>>
>>
>> but what's the point of this discussion?
>> how is being able to open a file with an arbitrary name (including
>> arbitrary extensions) related to passing args to Pd?
>>
>> i think the much more relevant question in the context of the collapsed
>> filename+args opening ("pd -open 'foo.pd: 12'") is, whether we can load
>> patches with spaces in them.
>> and the answer is of course: yes we can.
>>
>> so what do i get in this case?:
>> ```
>> $ ls -1
>> 'foo 42'
>> foo.pd
>> 'foo.pd: 12'
>> $ pd -open "foo.pd: 12"
>> ```
>>
>> while it may seem to be super-elegant to cram as much info into the
>> shortest possible cmdline, it seems that all ideas just fail the
>> "foolproof test".
>> the only character that is forbidden on all systems is "/".
>> we probably don't want to use *that* tough.
>>
>> so maybe we should concentrate on other ideas to pass arguments per patch.
>>
>> gfmards
>> IOhannes
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20200609/25489b52/attachment-0001.html>