On 03/12/2012 02:54 PM, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
IMHO, [routeOSC] should accept these two as the same thing:
[/bla/1/blabli 0.437(
[list /bla/1/blabli 0.437(
It'll make life easier for a lot of people, and I can't see any
disadvantage in that setup.
well, in pd in general, [list foo bar( is not exactly the same as [foo
bar(, unless I'm missing something (if so, please, feel free to
enlighten me ;)).
why not change also the behavior of [route] (and tons of other objects)
to make life easier for a lot of people ??
I don't really see the point.. [routeOSC] expects an OSC path, [list
/foo/bar 666( is obviously not one.
my 20 COP anyway.
y
--
[email protected]
http://yvanvolochine.com
_______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
