On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 22:23:11 +0100 IOhannes m zmoelnig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> hi. > i put this back to the pd-list. > i guess (and hope) it was only by accident to you answered me in private. > > Andy Farnell wrote: > > On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 21:08:05 +0100 > > None of the above. Behaviour should be normal but if it's instantiated > > without arguments then bangs are ignored and only positive (I just saw the > > bug report for negatives) numbers are processed. Any finite number of > > iterations is the users concern, having bang mean loop infinitely seems > > wrong. > > but a [bang(--[until] is not meant to loop infinitely. > it loops until a certain condition is reached. > As it stands the behaviour of [until] is correct, but it's a very dangerous object unlike almost every other Pd object it's the only one beginners can really screw up with. An object can tell if it has a connection made to any of its inlets, so perhaps the safety catch for [until] is not to work unless the condition inlet is connected? If the condition is never satisfied due to user programming error that's another thing but a first line of defence would be helpful. -- Use the source _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
