ben wrote:
> ...
> So that worked for getting the proper value, but the method I was using
> to get the second argument (argv+1) no longer works. Presumably because
> the "next" location is no longer the same.
> ...
Do you mean after you copied the data? Did you try either
threadargs->argv[1]
or
*(threadargs->argv+1)
? They should both give the value of the second argument.
Martin
_______________________________________________
Pd-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
