> From patching I know that it would be far more convenient to be able to > reference the patch-local $0 variable in messages. That's what users have requested $0 in msg boxes to do for over a decade. And that is what Ico implemented in Pd-l2ork.
> Perhaps in that case there should also be a [selector] object that reports > the selector of a message? getting it using [route] seemsunnecessarily > complicated.. What is wrong with [my_selector(--[list]--[$1( Also-- I'm not familiar with any cases where a user has requested the ability to reference the selector with $0. I'm only familiar with cases where a user has requested getting ce_dollarzero in msg boxes, a dev denying it, then another dev suggesting that $0 could expand to the selector in msg boxes without providing a use case. > On the other hand, having $0 represent the selector would be the most > consistent solution, because you can not get other patch-local variablesor > arguments in message boxes, [...] I don't understand what the word "solution" means here. If users have repeatedly requested msg box $0 to expand to glist's ce_dollarzero, why would Pd Vanilla give $0 in msg boxes a different function that is incompatible with object box $0? -Jonathan
_______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
