Cool, taking this suggestion. At least for now it will work either way, but it's much more readable with the abstraction name first so I changed the help file to invoke it that way.
cheers Miller On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 01:13:37PM -0400, Jaime Oliver wrote: > Well, > > What would happen if instead of calling clone like: > > [clone 16 my-abstraction 1 5 9] > > we called it with: > > [clone my-abstraction 16 1 5 9] > > and then $1 seems quite appropriate. > > ? > > J > > > > > On May 11, 2016, at 12:17 PM, Christof Ressi <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > I agree that $1 is most natural! > > > > However, what about adding an additional flag -foo for [clone], which > > changes the way creation arguments are parsed? > > Passing -foo could ignore the object ID and rather forward creation > > arguments just as they are. > > > > This wouldn't break the current behaviour of [clone], but provide some > > functionality to deal with ordinary abstractions more conveniently. > > > > Christof > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 11. Mai 2016 um 18:06 Uhr > > Von: "Ivica Bukvic" <[email protected]> > > An: "Miller Puckette" <[email protected]> > > Cc: "IOhannes m zmoelnig" <[email protected]>, Pd-list > > <[email protected]>, "Christof Ressi" <[email protected]> > > Betreff: Re: [PD] [clone]'s instance number > > What about having an if statement that detects clone object and if so, > > compensates for $2 discrepancy and assigns $1 to it instead and increments > > from there? This way the discrepancy is internalized as opposed to > > something user needs to deal with. > > -- > > Ivica Ico Bukvic, D.M.A. > > Associate Professor > > Computer Music > > ICAT Senior Fellow > > Director -- DISIS, L2Ork > > Virginia Tech > > School of Performing Arts – 0141 > > Blacksburg, VA 24061 > > (540) 231-6139 > > [email protected] > > www.performingarts.vt.edu[http://www.performingarts.vt.edu] > > disis.icat.vt.edu[http://disis.icat.vt.edu] > > l2ork.icat.vt.edu[http://l2ork.icat.vt.edu] > > ico.bukvic.net[http://ico.bukvic.net] > > > > On May 11, 2016 11:50, "Miller Puckette" <[email protected][[email protected]]> > > wrote:I gave this some thought but couldn't come up with anything more > > natural than > > the "$1" idea. It allows for changing the other arguments more easily than > > it would have been if the instance number were passed last. Also, somehow > > it felt more natural to have the instance number first. > > > > If there's interest in the idea, I could add arrguments to change the > > behavior (such as putting $1 last instead of first)... Offhand I doubt that > > would get used much though. > > > > cheers > > Miller > > > > > > > > On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 05:26:21PM +0200, Christof Ressi wrote: > >> There's also a pitfall: additional creation arguments for the cloned > >> abstraction will start with $2. > >> For example, in [clone 16 my-abstraction 1 5 9] '1' will be parsed as $2, > >> '5' as $3, '9' as $4 etc. > >> No problem, if the abstraction was written for being used with [clone], > >> but bad when cloning existing abstractions. > >> > >> I'm wondering if there could be a way to get the abstraction ID without > >> messing up existing abstractions... Maybe have a dedicated object? > >> > >> For now, I think it's important to mention the parsing of additional > >> creation arguments in the help file. > >> > >> Christof > >> > >>> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 11. Mai 2016 um 16:25 Uhr > >>> Von: "IOhannes m zmoelnig" <[email protected][[email protected]]> > >>> An: [email protected][[email protected]] > >>> Betreff: Re: [PD] [clone]'s instance number > >>> > >>> On 2016-05-11 16:18, Liam Goodacre wrote: > >>>> Would it be possible to access [clone]'s unique instance number from > >>>> within the patch, a bit like a creation argument? This could be used to > >>>> achieve differentiation between the abstractions, ie. if the abstraction > >>>> contains "tabread4~ $-1.array" and the $-1 is replaced with the instance > >>>> number, then each instance could read a different file. Of course there > >>>> are other ways of doing this, but it would be neat to do it with clone, > >>>> and I'm wondering if there's a way. > >>> > >>> > >>> isn't this what $1 is already doing in clone's instances? > >>> > >>> > >>> fgasdmr > >>> IOhannes > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> [email protected][[email protected]] mailing list > >>> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> > >>> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list[https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list] > >>> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> [email protected][[email protected]] mailing list > >> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> > >> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list[https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list] > > > > _______________________________________________ > > [email protected][[email protected]] mailing list > > UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> > > https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list[https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list] > > > > _______________________________________________ > > [email protected] mailing list > > UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> > > https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list > > > _______________________________________________ > [email protected] mailing list > UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> > https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
