I've been struggling to follow this thread... Can I just confirm that you're talking about adding a new mode for [clone], but that the original behavior will remain the same? Ie. if [clone] is un-flagged, will I still be able to invoke the instance number with $1?
> Date: Wed, 18 May 2016 20:01:24 -0700 > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > CC: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [PD] [clone]'s instance number > > OK... I'm talked into it. Should appear (as a "-x" optional flag) once 0.47-1 > is ready. > > cheers > Miller > > On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 11:07:36PM +0200, Christof Ressi wrote: > > > Do you mean something like you have 1-baz.pd, 2-baz.pd, etc. and then > > > inside your [clone] abstraction you've got [$1-baz]? I suppose this is a > > > potential use case. > > > > Haha, sorry bad wording from my side, but this also an interesting use > > case! > > > > I rather meant projects where everything is broken into modules which > > themselves contain other modules etc. The first module in the tree takes an > > ID as an *creation argument* and passes it down do its submodules. > > Something like that. > > > > > > > > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 18. Mai 2016 um 22:40 Uhr > > Von: "Matt Barber" <[email protected]> > > An: "Christof Ressi" <[email protected]> > > Cc: "Miller Puckette" <[email protected]>, Pd-list <[email protected]> > > Betreff: Re: [PD] [clone]'s instance number > > > > BTW: I guess, it's mostly a design question, whether to work with instance > > numbers inside abstractions and or to work with dispatching via the inlets > > and outlets. However, I can think of at least two cases where it's > > necessary to have immediate access to instance numbers inside an > > abstraction: > > a) [send~ foo-$1] or [catch~ bar-$1] to disambiguate audio inputs/outputs, > > because you can't set these two dynamically like [r~] and [throw~] > > > > > > Where do you envision the corresponding [r~ foo-$1] or [throw~ bar-$1] to > > reside? If it's in the same abstraction, then $0 ought to work just as > > well. > > b) instantiate another abstraction by the instance number (nested > > abstractions) > > > > > > Do you mean something like you have 1-baz.pd, 2-baz.pd, etc. and then > > inside your [clone] abstraction you've got [$1-baz]? I suppose this is a > > potential use case. > > > > So the current behaviour of [clone] (passing the instance number as $1) can > > be important and very useful. The alternative mode I proposed is mainly for > > convenience but I'm sure it would pay off in the long run! > > > > > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 18. Mai 2016 um 18:45 Uhr > > > Von: "Miller Puckette" <[email protected]> > > > An: "Alex Norman" <[email protected][[email protected]]> > > > > > Cc: "Christof Ressi" <[email protected][[email protected]]>, > > > Pd-list <[email protected][[email protected]]> > > > Betreff: Re: [PD] [clone]'s instance number > > > > > > OK... sounds like it's worth putting in. I guess with the one-letter it > > > already takes (-s) I should also add something like a -e flag to put the > > > number argument at the end of the list instead of the beginning, or > > > something > > > like that. > > > > > > cheers > > > Miller > > > > > > On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 07:20:29AM -0700, Alex Norman wrote: > > > > I see your point, the abstraction need not know it's instance number > > > > since only the messages meant for it would be dispatched to it.. If you > > > > don't care about using sends directed to a specific abstraction then > > > > the $1 does nothing for you and if the flag to clone could ditch the $1 > > > > to instance setting and just set the arguments to the abstraction > > > > [clone -flag blah 20 1 2 3] makes 20 copies of blah with args $1=1 > > > > $2=2.. You could use more of your existing abstractions as is, using > > > > their args the same way with or without clone. > > > > > > > > I'm warming up to that idea. > > > > > > > > Alex > > > > > > > > On May 17, 2016 6:44:51 PM PDT, Christof Ressi > > > > <[email protected][[email protected]]> wrote: > > > > >you can still disambiguate, because incoming messages are dispatched by > > > > >the instance number and outgoing messages are prepended with it! > > > > > > > > > >My suggestion was mainly concerning all abstractions that work with > > > > >inlets and outlets (as opposed to sends and receives), where you > > > > >basically pass a message and get something out. This could be anything, > > > > >from simple message filtering to a perlin noise generator. Or also > > > > >existing audio modules that work with a message inlet. If there was > > > > >such a flag, you could take any of these abstractions as they are, > > > > >control them separately by prepending the instance number and route the > > > > >message output (or use the sum of the audio output). > > > > > > > > > >I guess, people will use [clone] mainly for voice management for > > > > >synthesizers, granular synthesis, complicated nested patches etc., but > > > > >I also see a great potential for massive data generation by using > > > > >existing simple abstractions and cloning them. > > > > > > > > > >Personally, I have many abstractions I would like to use with [clone], > > > > >but either I'd have to rewrite them or make a wrapper abstraction. It's > > > > >not a big deal, it's just that an alternative forwarding mode would > > > > >provide some additional convenience (and could also encourage other > > > > >usages for [clone]). > > > > > > > > > >Anyway, I can totally live without this feature, but would be happy to > > > > >have it :-). > > > > > > > > > >> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 18. Mai 2016 um 02:35 Uhr > > > > >> Von: "Miller Puckette" <[email protected][[email protected]]> > > > > >> An: "Christof Ressi" <[email protected][[email protected]]> > > > > >> Cc: Pd-list <[email protected][[email protected]]> > > > > >> Betreff: Re: [PD] [clone]'s instance number > > > > >> > > > > >> I'm not sure... would anyone ever use this feature? The patch in > > > > >question > > > > >> would ahve to take arguments (if not, thre's no problem) but not use > > > > >them to > > > > >> disambiguate the instances (because clone will set them all equal > > > > >anyway). > > > > >> I have trouble imaginig anyone building a patch like that. > > > > >> > > > > >> cheers > > > > >> Miller > > > > >> > > > > >> On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 12:54:16AM +0200, Christof Ressi wrote: > > > > >> > What do you think about the idea with a flag for changing the way > > > > >creation arguments are forwarded? It would be really handy if you could > > > > >write something like > > > > >> > [clone -flag 100 my-abstraction 5 6 7] and $1 $2 $3 will be > > > > >substituted by 5 6 7 instead of [N] 5 6. This way you could use > > > > >existing abstractions as they are, without the need for writing a > > > > >wrapper abstraction to handle the creation argument forwarding. > > > > >> > > > > > >> > Christof > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > Gesendet: Dienstag, 17. Mai 2016 um 04:05 Uhr > > > > >> > > Von: "Miller Puckette" <[email protected][[email protected]]> > > > > >> > > An: "Jaime Oliver" > > > > >> > > <[email protected][[email protected]]> > > > > >> > > Cc: "Christof Ressi" > > > > >> > > <[email protected][[email protected]]>, Pd-list > > > > ><[email protected][[email protected]]> > > > > >> > > Betreff: Re: [PD] [clone]'s instance number > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > 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][[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][[email protected]]> > > > > >> > > > > An: "Miller Puckette" <[email protected][[email protected]]> > > > > >> > > > > Cc: "IOhannes m zmoelnig" > > > > >> > > > > <[email protected][[email protected]]>, Pd-list > > > > ><[email protected][[email protected]]>, "Christof Ressi" > > > > ><[email protected][[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][[email protected]] > > > > >> > > > > www.performingarts.vt.edu[http://www.performingarts.vt.edu][http://www.performingarts.vt.edu[http://www.performingarts.vt.edu]] > > > > >> > > > > disis.icat.vt.edu[http://disis.icat.vt.edu][http://disis.icat.vt.edu[http://disis.icat.vt.edu]] > > > > >> > > > > l2ork.icat.vt.edu[http://l2ork.icat.vt.edu][http://l2ork.icat.vt.edu[http://l2ork.icat.vt.edu]] > > > > >> > > > > ico.bukvic.net[http://ico.bukvic.net][http://ico.bukvic.net[http://ico.bukvic.net]] > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > On May 11, 2016 11:50, "Miller Puckette" > > > > ><[email protected][[email protected]][[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]][[email protected][[email protected]]]> > > > > >> > > > >>> An: > > > > >> > > > >>> [email protected][[email protected]][[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]][[email protected][[email protected]]] > > > > >> > > > >>> mailing list > > > > >> > > > >>> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> > > > > >https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list[https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list][https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list[https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list]] > > > > >> > > > >>> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> _______________________________________________ > > > > >> > > > >> [email protected][[email protected]][[email protected][[email protected]]] > > > > >> > > > >> mailing list > > > > >> > > > >> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> > > > > >https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list[https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list][https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list[https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list]] > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > >> > > > > [email protected][[email protected]][[email protected][[email protected]]] > > > > >> > > > > mailing list > > > > >> > > > > UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> > > > > >https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list[https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list][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][[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
