Yes, I checked help patches, I saw that they are kind of opposite, the send~ and the catch~. I was just wondering if there were any differences “under the hood”?
Do you for example know if there is a block of delay added to catch~ or tabsend~, like Miller mentioned there would be if the symbol naming feature was added to send~? Best wishes, Jakob > On 17 Jan 2023, at 21.01, Christof Ressi <i...@christofressi.com> wrote: > > >> Beside that you can have several throw~ with same name and only one send~ >> with a specific name? > That's the main point. You can have several [catch~] objects summing into the > same [throw~] object. Conversely, you can have many [receive~] objects > reading from the same [send~]. So in a way they do the exact opposite. > > On 17.01.2023 20:57, Jakob Skouborg wrote: >> I’ve never used catch~ or throw~before. Tried it and it works :) >> >> Just out of curiosity, what's the difference between send~/receive~ and >> throw~/catch~? Beside that you can have several throw~ with same name and >> only one send~ with a specific name? Is there a block of delay added to >> throw~, like Miller mentioned there would be for send~, if we add the option >> to change name with a symbol? >> >> Best wishes, >> Jakob >> >>> On 17 Jan 2023, at 20.47, Alexandre Torres Porres <por...@gmail.com >>> <mailto:por...@gmail.com>> wrote: >>> >>> so, [throw~] can set the destination, why not use it? >>> >>> Em ter., 17 de jan. de 2023 às 16:44, Christof Ressi >>> <i...@christofressi.com <mailto:i...@christofressi.com>> escreveu: >>> >>>> I see, I wonder why exactly you need this, like a specific use case. >>> One concrete example: you have a modular system where the output of an >>> abstraction may be used by other abstractions, but they do not know >>> anything about each other. For this you might want to use a [send~] and >>> [receive~] objects where the names are chosen by the user, e.g. with symbol >>> atoms. >>> >>> In general it's problematic if a parameter can only be set as a creation >>> argument because sometimes not everything is known at creation time. This >>> can be worked around with dynamic patching, but as we know, this is not >>> "officially" supported. >>> >>> @Miller: a settable [send~] can be written easily, you just have to call >>> canvas_update_dsp() after changing the name. Of course, this is not >>> realtime-safe, but it's better than nothing. >>> >>> Christof >>> >>> On 17.01.2023 20:21, Alexandre Torres Porres wrote: >>>> Em ter., 17 de jan. de 2023 às 16:07, Jakob Skouborg >>>> <syntaxerro...@hotmail.com <mailto:syntaxerro...@hotmail.com>> escreveu: >>>> I will check the ELSE options, thanks, all though it is the sender that >>>> doesn’t offer option to change name. >>>> >>>> For adding it to Vanilla version, Miller gave an answer, which indicated >>>> there is not an easy way to do it, without adding a block of delay. But >>>> nice to see that an issue has been raised, mentioning it. >>>> >>>> The issue on github is for an inlet to receive, not being able to set send >>>> name in [send~]. >>>> >>>> I just need to be able to change the send~ name. >>>> >>>> I see, I wonder why exactly you need this, like a specific use case. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Pd-dev mailing list >>>> Pd-dev@lists.iem.at <mailto:Pd-dev@lists.iem.at> >>>> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev >>>> <https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Pd-dev mailing list >>> Pd-dev@lists.iem.at <mailto:Pd-dev@lists.iem.at> >>> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev >>> <https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Pd-dev mailing list >>> Pd-dev@lists.iem.at <mailto:Pd-dev@lists.iem.at> >>> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev >>> <https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev> >>
_______________________________________________ Pd-dev mailing list Pd-dev@lists.iem.at https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
