On 07/19/2015 09:55 PM, IOhannes m zmölnig wrote: >> > And I don't see how it wouldn't work if the table had its contents saved, >> > for example... > have the [partconv~] object be created before the [table]?
in any case: a table saving its own content is an edge case. if your [partconv~] only works with tables that have in-patch-data, i would consider it broken (=> more broken than it currently is). ... storing table data within patches doesn't scale well: among other things it uses the second most inefficient storage format and doesn't allow to use different data in multiple instances... fmsdr IOhannes
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
