On Mon, 7 Mar 2011, Jonathan Wilkes wrote:
I know, but I think your suggestion is cleaner-- you can get then number of args by [$@(--[list length] so $# isn't needed, and as you point out, having a way of saying "put args from $n and up in this object box" is very useful.
But what would be the syntax for it ?
(Without that, one either has to make the number of args static, or use dynamic patching-- i.e., either be less flexible or complicated.)
But dynamic patching does deserve to become easier too, and more high-level. Imagine something like what [#in] or [#out] does for loading plugins, except it would be available for general use for any purpose whatsoever. Then imagine other things.
PS: the [delwrite~] clear method http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=3170987&group_id=55736&atid=478072 is still assigned to "nobody", because it's waiting for any of the five project admins to click on a button... It also didn't appear on [email protected] either : http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-dev/2011-02/thread.htmlIf one of the admins (finally) takes care of that, would you consider submitting a patch for $@ with the functionality you wrote in the comment?
It was just a reminder, not a condition. _______________________________________________________________________ | Mathieu Bouchard ---- tél: +1.514.383.3801 ---- Villeray, Montréal, QC
_______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
