Le mardi 11 août 2009 à 13:24 -0400, Mathieu Bouchard a écrit : > On Tue, 11 Aug 2009, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: > > > Yeah, good point. The "connection order" statement should really be a > > footnote. [trigger] should really be introduced before talking about > > the connection order. > > I don't believe that any of those things should be introduced before or > after the other, nor that any of those things deserves to be but a > footnote in the other's text, or anything else like that. > > There is a reason for the existence of [trigger], and it's not "for > triggering things" in any traditional meaning of the word in a way that is > contrastive with what any object not named [trigger] does... the meaning > of the word "triggering" in a pd context is conditioned by the existence > of the class-name [trigger] and not the other way around. > > [trigger] has been created especially for ordering things in a way that a > fanout can't, that is, visually, explicitly, and unambiguously; thus > [trigger] and the very need for ordering go hand in hand.
Or, sometimes, it can be used to connect an outlet of an object to its cold inlet. For example for a counter : [1( | [-1( |/ [+ ]x[t f] | [print] ++ Jack > > _ _ __ ___ _____ ________ _____________ _____________________ ... > | Mathieu Bouchard - tél:+1.514.383.3801, Montréal, Québec > _______________________________________________ [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
