Thank you Iohannes for your answer. I have me too several doubts about the way I wrote it and in general if there is a "good" way to implement this feature. About your questions, it works with -noloadbang mode and in subpatch. If I put a [loadbang] with the same delay than the [loadmess] clock [loadmess] arrives first.
Anyway, actually I don't think to make public this code because I'm not convince about it. Thank you again. Best regards. 2016-03-31 14:52 GMT+02:00 IOhannes m zmoelnig <[email protected]>: > On 2016-03-31 12:32, Marco Matteo Markidis wrote: > > So, it is not the best programming practice but it works and it is quite > > transparent from the user point of view. > > i think it is less question of "good programming practice" but of (not) > breaking functionality. > if you introduce some clock delay, then the object make break the > expected order of execution. > - how does it work in "-nogui" mode? > - how does it work in "-noloadbang" mode? > - how does it work if the object is hidden in a sub-patch/abstraction? > - how does it relate to other [loadbang]s? > - how does it relate to other nested [loadbang]s? > - how does it work with other [delay]ed [loadbang]s? > > using [delay] to ensure a certain order of execution can often lead to > subtle problems. > i wonder whether the feature of being able to suppress the bang via a > pressed key during load time is worth the potential problems it makes. > > fgamsdr > IOhannes > > > _______________________________________________ > [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
