Two things:

1) the lack of "$0" in messages is only a symptom of a bigger problem with 
scope of binding symbols in Pd.  I'd rather see new objects (or wrapper 
objects) that handle scope in a sensible manner which doesn't require typing 
"$0-" at all.  There's already no need for $0 in your preset_hub/node design.  
Why not extend the hub/node idea and get rid of the need for $0 completely?

[hub]/[node] = [send]/[receive]
[hub~]/[node~] = [throw~]/[catch~]
etc.


2) On a more superficial note, isn't the problem that Pd doesn't store stray 
"\n" characters in message boxes?  The only time I can think of when one would 
have a real desire for $0 in a message box is when initializing a bunch of 
receivers:

[; $0-foo 1;
$0-bar 2;
$0-flub 3;(

But if the box stored "\n" you could get the same clean format with commas:
[foo 1,
bar 2,
flub 3(
|
[zerofy-me] <- add a "$0-" to the selector

|        |

[send]

No ugly zeros, no leading semi-colon, everybody wins!


-Jonathan



On Wednesday, September 10, 2014 2:27 AM, Ivica Bukvic <[email protected]> wrote:
 



On Sep 10, 2014 1:17 AM, "Chris McCormick" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi Ivica,
>
> On 10/09/14 04:19, Ivica Ico Bukvic wrote:
> > Yet, I wonder why message shouldn't be able to pre-parse $0 into a valid
> > dollarzero (canvas instance), when there will never be a message one
> >
> > Thoughts?
>
> There has been a lot of discussion regarding this over the years which
> might be good to read to get an idea on the different
> philosophical/language design issues:
>
> <http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.multimedia.puredata.general/56365>
Thanks, Chris, for bringing this to my attention. Since one of Miller's core 
ideas behind pd is absolute backwards compatibility, most of alternatives 
suggested in that thread would cause unacceptable breakage with backwards 
compatibility or a really kludge workaround for the support of legacy patches. 
It seems to me Phil really has a point I completely agree with. FWIW, I am 
looking to implement this in pd-l2ork and as soon as I get a better idea about 
the recursion Miller mentioned and how to circumvent it, it should find its way 
into pd-l2ork's source.
Best,
Ico

>
> Cheers,
>
> Chris.
>
> --
> http://mccormick.cx/


_______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
_______________________________________________
Pd-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev

Reply via email to