--- On Tue, 10/5/10, IOhannes m zmölnig <[email protected]> wrote:
> From: IOhannes m zmölnig <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [PD] namecanvas obsolete? Why? Re: Dynamic Graph on Parent > To: [email protected] > Date: Tuesday, October 5, 2010, 12:10 PM > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 10/04/2010 12:42 AM, Jonathan Wilkes wrote: > > > > Though this fulfills brandon's requirements, it still > doesn't > > obsolete [namecanvas]. There are some things you > can do > > with dynamic patching and mouse messages that rely on > namecanvas > > how do they rely on properties of [namecanvas] that cannot > be done with > [sendcanvas]? Actually, I take that back-- I forgot that I could just use a [s]/[r] pair with the [r] going to the [sendcanvas] object. So yes, as far as I can tell, if [sendcanvas] were an internal object it would obsolete [namecanvas]. > > fgmasdr > IOhannes > > > PS: and you are aware that your not-pretty tricks won't > work if the > patch-window is not opened... Yep. I'm just "vis 1"-ing one patch-window, cutting an object, then "vis 0"-ing it, and I never see the open patch-window. -Jonathan > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) > Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ > > iEYEARECAAYFAkyq+bMACgkQkX2Xpv6ydvS5GwCghp7G1mr2ogxtjk/Q2ieN8ETz > kd8Ani6I3BZOIVMV9Dt7qEfUStDcD48/ > =A5tv > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > _______________________________________________ > [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
