On Fri, 25 Apr 2008 16:39:04 +0200 Frank Barknecht <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hallo, > > another point to take into account are arguments: What should "pow 2" > output? Well, presuming we do keep compatability [pow~ 2] will continue to behave as it does in Cyclone. For the proposed intrinsic [**~ ] operator then [**~ 2] would place the argument in the exponent position according to established Pd convention, so [**~ 2] would be the same as squaring. It would replace /\ [*~] though I expect most of us will continue to use that form. For altering the base then one would say [sig~ 3] | [**~ ] which weems in keeping with other uses. > > Ciao > -- > Frank > > Julian Peterson hat gesagt: // Julian Peterson wrote: > > > I don't really think PD-Max compatibility should factor much into > > decisions about improving PD, especially when it would force 'untidy' > > concessions on the part of PD to facilitate awkward max paradigms > > (like right to left execution order, etc.). > > > > If [1]**[2] (where [1] and [2] are inlets) seems the cleanest and most > > consistent syntax, then it should certainly be used; and bite our > > thumbs at Max. > > > > _______________________________________________ > PD-list@iem.at mailing list > UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> > http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list -- Use the source _______________________________________________ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list