Martin Peach wrote: > IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote: >> the [text3d]... objects expect a "string" message with pdstrings >> (according to moocows stuff). > > OK, so the message [string( is being interpreted by pd as a selector for > A_STRING instead of just a message "string", because "string" has become a > reserved word.
correct. my proposal is therefore to entirely skip reserved words when introducing new types and solely rely on the atom-type (A_BLOB), rather than the list selector. do you have any strong reason why you need to reserve a selector when introducing a new atom-type? (apart from: "that was the way it seemed to be done") > >> your string-patch adds a special message "string" for your strings. >> i think that is where the problem comes in: A_GIMME != A_STRING >> > > The latest version of the patch in cvs calls it A_BLOB instead of A_STRING. > Does this resolve the issue? Or will it cause [blob( messages to go wrong? the problem is not with A_BLOB vs A_STRING, but with use of selectors. see above. fmasdr. IOhannes _______________________________________________ PD-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
