> > I just can't see how there could be any problem, or, in other words, I > > can't see how $0 becoming "0" in messages is a desired feature or if > anyone > > could rely on this behaviour. > > "0" certainly isn't a good behaviour. >
What would be the good behaviour, in this case? > > > > > But, if there's any concern or resistance to this, no problem, my > > alternative would be to create an external that would do that. but then > I'd > > like to know here first where should I aim my efforts, if to a Pull > Request > > to Vanilla or to an external design. > > > > like mostly, i'm opposing. > this has been discussed about 15 years ago, and my arguments still stand > (mainly: consistency with dollar-parsing throughout Pd) > Yes, but there is no consistency either now. So the question would be: is the current inconsistency a productive one (do people benefit from having a 0 there), or would people benefit more from having an inconsistency that provides them with a new useful feature? For me, I can't count how many times I had to add a [$0], or a pack or some extra workaround before a message so that I could send messages to my variables (I hardly use variables without a $0). Joao
_______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
