A glorious hack, Jean-Yves! This should work well for what I am envisioning. One strange thing, though: if you move the subpatch (that displays the selected array), the other array is visible underneath it. I wonder what's up with that?
Thanks for the solution, Jean-Yves (and Chuck for suggesting it was possible in the first place). Phil Chuckk Hubbard wrote: > Well-done, that looks like the perfect solution. I did notice these > functions mentioned in the code, with xmargin and ymargin as arguments > of a longer function call, but I hadn't followed up to see what else > went in the message. > I believe this is your answer, Phil. > > Another one for msg-docs, I think. > > -Chuckk > > On Dec 10, 2007 1:11 PM, Jean-Yves GRATIUS <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Hi, >> I have tried to change graph-on-parents settings by message for displaying >> different arrays, it seems to work.. >> I did'nt test it with large tables. >> (included patch : switchingGOPtables.pd). >> >> Jean Yves Gratius <http://jy.gratius.free.fr> >> >> >> Chuckk Hubbard a écrit : >> >> >> On Dec 9, 2007 10:50 PM, Phil Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> Hi Chuck, >> >> I think you're right; there's no way to avoid the copying. It's good to >> dream, though. :-) >> >> I have done some experimenting, and I think I'm on to something. If >> you create a graph from the put menu, then right-click and select >> Open; and then Put an array on the opened subpatch, you can see the >> red outline where you can decide what will be graphed-on the parent >> graph. >> >> It would not be too hard to send editmode and mouse movement messages >> to that canvas to move arrays around inside it; and it probably would >> actually be more efficient than copying. But I also notice that the >> graph subpatch has, in its options, an x and y margin, which moves the >> red outline. IF it's possible to change these values with messages, >> it could be trivial to move that red outline to cover several >> well-placed arrays, meaning that the graph would indeed switch arrays >> like you want. >> I started to look at the Pd code to see if I can find such a message >> mentioned; if I find it I'll let you know. >> >> -Chuckk >> >> >> >> >> Chuckk Hubbard wrote: >> >> It would be possible, if not CPU-efficient, to have them all hidden in >> table objects, and simply use tabread and tabwrite to copy them to the >> skeleton array when you want to switch. You would only need one >> tabread and tabwrite pair, just different ways to specify the target >> of tabread. >> I would envision binding the tab key to page through them. >> >> But it is possible to put several arrays in one graph which makes me >> wonder if there might even be a pure GUI way to do it. Kind of makes >> me want to take a look... >> >> -Chuckk >> >> On Dec 8, 2007 10:26 PM, Phil Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> >> This probably fits into the category of a wish for PD; I think there's >> no way to do it currently, but I'd love to be proven wrong! >> >> I'd like to be able to change the data an array points to rather than >> actually change the data in the array. The scenario which me think of >> this is, I'd like to have a display of a currently-selected waveform >> (which could be one of many pre-allocated arrays). It would be >> wonderful to have a level of indirection where the display-array can be >> given a new address [object reference?] to one of the various >> pre-allocated arrays, after which it redraws itself. >> >> I suppose this unleashes all the evils of pointers (multiple references >> to memory, etc.), but it would a serious advantage, performance-wise, >> for the scenario I'm envisioning. >> >> I also think it would be very cool if arrays could act as buttons...but >> that's a different subject. >> >> >> Phil Stone >> pkstonemusic.com >> _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
