--- On Sat, 9/25/10, Mathieu Bouchard <[email protected]> wrote:
> From: Mathieu Bouchard <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [#expr] (was: jMax) > To: "Jonathan Wilkes" <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected], [email protected] > Date: Saturday, September 25, 2010, 3:07 PM > On Sat, 25 Sep 2010, Jonathan Wilkes > wrote: > > > Hm, [expr a$0] works. > > Yeah, but I'd use $0-a everywhere else. I'd like to be able > to write 'a' for '$0-a', and I know that there isn't a > standard for local-variables in Pd, but I'd like to pretend > that there is one, and if I have to write a$0, there isn't > one. Furthermore, when I write a$0, I'm probably trying to > write a complicated formula and thus I'd rather not have $0 > in my face. I want to write 'a' for local variables, and if > ever I want a global variable, I wouldn't mind writing '::a' > for it, because local is the most common case by far. > > So, how do you suggest that we do that ? Seems like this is a bigger problem, because most of the time when I use send/receive, IEMGUIs, or [value] in an [expr]-less context I am also using $0-foo as the most common case. So I think your reasoning for not wanting $0 "in your face" in a complex formula also extends quite naturally to Pd in general. Anytime I use [s $0-a] I'd rather write [s a] and have it be local by default. -Jonathan > > > _______________________________________________________________________ > | Mathieu Bouchard ------------------------------ Villeray, > Montréal, QC _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
