It piqued my curiousity this morning... whether you could use $1 arguments in the name of an object. So, I made a abstraction this morning called inle.pd and it works.
You can instatiate the abstraction as [inle t] or [inle t~] I don't think this approach is at all useful, though. Chuck On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 9:09 AM, Miller Puckette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > No... I hope to figure out a good way to permit that. Meanwhile, there's > also a bug in that inlet~ doesn't take numbers "correctly" (doesn't > promote them to signals) > > cheers > Miller > > > > On Tue, May 06, 2008 at 10:07:04AM -0400, Matt Barber wrote: > > Hello, > > > > Is there a way to make an abstraction that has one inlet that takes > > both signal and control messages (like osc~, e.g., or fiddle~ which > > gets audio and setting info, etc.)? It's part of the API for objects; > > it seems to me there ought to be a way to do this with abstractions as > > well. I'm envisioning an inlet object that splits signal and control > > into two outlets which can be parsed from there. Something that uses > > the signal and control values to do the same thing (as in osc~) might > > be difficult to implement in an abstraction, but having signal and > > optional settings messages go to the same inlet would add to the > > abstraction-as-object nature of PD... does it exist? > > > > Thanks, > > > > Matt > > > > _______________________________________________ > > [email protected] mailing list > > UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> > http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list > > _______________________________________________ > [email protected] mailing list > UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> > http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list > _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
