----- Original Message ----- > From: Cyrille Henry <[email protected]> > To: Jonathan Wilkes <[email protected]> > Cc: Roman Haefeli <[email protected]>; "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > Sent: Friday, June 8, 2012 4:16 AM > Subject: Re: [PD] settable receive again > > > hello, > > Le 08/06/2012 00:43, Jonathan Wilkes a écrit : > >> I've posted about it before. Just imagine [s] inside abstraction [foo] > and >> [r] inside abstraction [bar]. I want to type [foo blah] and have my > abstraction >> set the inner [s] symbol to [parent-$0]-blah. Easy enough. Similarly, I > want >> [bar blah] to set its inner [r] symbol to [parent-$0]-blah. Roadblock. >> > [s parent-$0-$1] > [r parent-$0-$1]
That probably wasn't clear. I don't want [symbol parent-$0-$1]; inside my abstractions I want the parent $0 prefixed to $1 as the symbol. In other words, my abstractions make it so that I don't have to type "$0-" in every s/r pair where I want canvas locality which as I said is most of the cases by far. (My abstractions do other stuff which I wrote about in the nonlocal scope thread, but that isn't important to this discussion.) > > anyway, if you really in need for a settable send and a settable receive, you > can always use prepends and route that are both settable. > see small attached abstraction. I think you are stuck for two reasons 1) [r setable_send_receive] is global. I want the parent $0 in front of it so that my abstraction symbols don't clash with other abstractions. 2) Your example filters messages in a way that s/r doesn't. It's possible to hack around this using three extra objects. It is also possible to get the arguments of an abstraction in Pd Vanilla. With the former, I'd rather send a single message to an inlet and be done. -Jonathan > > cheers > c > _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
