Re: [PD] shrinking subpatches!?

[Ingo]

I'm on 0.47.1 on Windows 7 and it shrinks.


> Subject: [PD] shrinking subpatches!?
>
> in the project I'm working on I have a couple of subpatches which shrink
> vertically whenever I close and open them...
> I made a funny little patch to demonstrate the issue. can anyone reproduce
> this on his/her machine?
>
> I'm on Pd 0.48.1 Windows 7



___
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> 
https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] shrinking subpatches!?

[Alexandre Torres Porres]

doesn't shrink

macOS 10.12.6, pd 0.48-1

2018-04-05 18:04 GMT-03:00 Lucas Cordiviola :

> It shrinks here.
>
> 0.48-1
>
> Win 8.1
>
> Mensaje telepatico asistido por maquinas.
>
> On 4/5/2018 5:55 PM, Christof Ressi wrote:
> > in the project I'm working on I have a couple of subpatches which shrink
> vertically whenever I close and open them...
> > I made a funny little patch to demonstrate the issue. can anyone
> reproduce this on his/her machine?
> >
> > I'm on Pd 0.48.1 Windows 7
>
> ___
> Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list
> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/
> listinfo/pd-list
>
___
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> 
https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] suggestion: $0 in messages

[Alexandre Torres Porres]

2018-04-05 16:17 GMT-03:00 Dan Wilcox :

> test? https://github.com/pure-data/pure-data/pull/346
>

wow, didn't see that coming :) THANKS!

Well, since I opened this thread and mentioned I wanted to do such a Pull
Request, let me respond so some issues raised here. One argument against
this - and one that had me going there - was the inconsistency that $0 in
messages is part of the same thing as arguments, and that $0 in messages
should be the selector. But this has been challenged and shown inconsistent
on its own, as then $0 should be the abstraction name, so I'm not convinced.

I actually always thought/perceived $0 as something else, a third
usage/case of dollarsigns. I guess many considered so, as many of us were
confused as to why not $0 don't work in messages. Hence, I'm actually
interested and after a canonical and formal definition of $0, for the sole
purpose I don't say stupid things to my students. I checked Pd's tutorial
(14.dollarsigns.pd), and it says that the different behaviour in objects
and messages "*may sound inconsistent, but it's not. Object and message
boxes are both actually messages, but in the case of the Object box the
message is passed at creation time, and for the Message box, at message
time*". As I read it, I don't find a conflict or inconsistency if "$0" also
gets evaluated and passed at "message time".

So after all the discussion, I still can't see the issue, as $0 becoming 0
doesn't seem of any use or a good behaviour. But I'm still open to more
clarification. Now, a reasoning in favor of adopting this is that Purr Data
is using it. Not that I think Pd should really adopt anything that a fork
decides to do, on the contrary, but it's hard not to see this does matter,
as many users are now comfortable, happy and abusing this feature in Purr
Data, and those patches can't run in Pd.

cheers
___
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> 
https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

[PD] shrinking subpatches!?

[Christof Ressi]

in the project I'm working on I have a couple of subpatches which shrink 
vertically whenever I close and open them... 
I made a funny little patch to demonstrate the issue. can anyone reproduce this 
on his/her machine? 

I'm on Pd 0.48.1 Windows 7

shrink-test.pd
Description: Binary data
___
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> 
https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] suggestion: $0 in messages

[Dan Wilcox]

test? https://github.com/pure-data/pure-data/pull/346 



Dan Wilcox
@danomatika 
danomatika.com 
robotcowboy.com 



___
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> 
https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] suggestion: $0 in messages

[Seb Shader via Pd-list]

>>>What is wrong with [my_selector(--[list]--[$1(







>> for instance, [42(--[list]--[$1( will give 42 not float, 
>> similarly [symbol crabs(--[list]--[$1( will give crabs not symbol 
> >Also it seems reasonable to just have 1 object box for querying a selector, 
> >which is a main element of the pd message environment.


>That makes sense.


>Are you after the literal selector in this case, or the one that the 
>documentation 
>implies should be there? For example, if I feed a list with a single floatarg 
>(e.g., "list 42") to [selector] does it tell me the selector is "float" or 
>"list"?










I would say whatever route would do with it, in this case float


-Seb













___
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> 
https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] suggestion: $0 in messages

[Christof Ressi]

I don't understand this whole thing about getting the selector of a message to 
a msgbox and why this could be a useful feature. can someone give me a real 
world example?

when I have a msgbox like [foo $1 $2 $3 $4( I expect the input to be a list of 
(at least) 4 atoms which is then expanded. [foo $1( expects a list of length 1 
- why should I care about the selector? if I need the type of a message for my 
program logic, this can already be done with [route] (with anythings to [list 
split 1]-->[list trim]).

so I think expanding $0 to the selector - although reasonable from a 
theoretical point of view - would be rather pointless in practice. 
I agree with people pointing out that $0 in object boxes already has nothing to 
do with the argument list and is an inconsistency in itself so I think it's 
actually quite consistent to also introduce it to msgboxes :-). needless to say 
that I would find it incredibly handy.

Pd users have been accepting the fact that $0 in object boxes expands to a 
unique canvas ID for decades now. why do some people think introducing this 
behaviour to msgboxes could confuse anyone? on the contrary: new users are 
often surprised that it *doesn't* work the same way as in object boxes.

BTW: I think it's unfortunate that msgbox allows 'anything' messages at all.


Gesendet: Donnerstag, 05. April 2018 um 17:44 Uhr
Von: "Jonathan Wilkes via Pd-list" 
An: pd-list@lists.iem.at, "sebfumas...@aol.com" 
Betreff: Re: [PD] suggestion: $0 in messages

>>What is wrong with [my_selector(--[list]--[$1(

 
> for instance, [42(--[list]--[$1( will give 42 not float,
> similarly [symbol crabs(--[list]--[$1( will give crabs not symbol
> Also it seems reasonable to just have 1 object box for querying a selector,
> which is a main element of the pd message environment.
 
That makes sense.
 
Are you after the literal selector in this case, or the one that the 
documentation
implies should be there? For example, if I feed a list with a single floatarg
(e.g., "list 42") to [selector] does it tell me the selector is "float" or 
"list"?
 

 

 

 

 
>>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?
 > here "solution" means a good way to resolve $0 in message boxes..I don't 
think what users request is necessarily the end all of reasons to implement a 
feature in a language..
 
$0 in message boxes may be the most often requested feature for Pd.
That certainly doesn't mean it has to be implemented.
 
But filling $0 with something completely unrelated is probably a good way
to irritate your userbase for very little gain.
 
-Jonathan
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ___ Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing 
list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> 
https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

___
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> 
https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] suggestion: $0 in messages

[Jonathan Wilkes via Pd-list]

>>What is wrong with [my_selector(--[list]--[$1(
> for instance, [42(--[list]--[$1( will give 42 not float, > similarly [symbol 
> crabs(--[list]--[$1( will give crabs not symbol > Also it seems reasonable to 
> just have 1 object box for querying a selector, > which is a main element of 
> the pd message environment.
That makes sense.
Are you after the literal selector in this case, or the one that the 
documentation implies should be there? For example, if I feed a list with a 
single floatarg (e.g., "list 42") to [selector] does it tell me the selector is 
"float" or "list"?

>>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?
> here "solution" means a good way to resolve $0 in message boxes..I don't 
> think what users request is necessarily the end all of reasons to implement a 
> feature in a language..
$0 in message boxes may be the most often requested feature for Pd. That 
certainly doesn't mean it has to be implemented.
But filling $0 with something completely unrelated is probably a good way to 
irritate your userbase for very little gain.

-Jonathan




  ___
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> 
https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] suggestion: $0 in messages

[Jonathan Wilkes via Pd-list]

>> whereas you cannot get an abstraction's selector (which would >> be handy 
>> for error reporting). 

> What is the selector of an abstraction? 
[my_abs arg1 arg2]
The selector is "my_abs".
The reason consistency probably keeps coming up is because everything on the Pd 
canvas as well as Pd files is just a Pd message. The possibility of learning a 
single set of rules for how messages behave is way easier than keeping track of 
special cases and inconsistencies.
So having a rule, "$0 expands to the first element of the argument vector," is 
great if the user can be guaranteed that the rule holds regardless of context 
of the evaluation.
On the other hand, suppose the rule is, "$0 expands to the first element of the 
argument vector UNLESS we're loading a canvas in which case it expands to a 
unique value to simulate locality with Pd's global binding mechanism." That's 
harder to reason about.
If you want $0 as selector in msg boxes
you could try to teach the inconsistency by reminding users that load time and 
message time are completely different contexts and therefore may have different 
expansion behaviors for dollarsign variables. But they're still going to notice 
that $1-n have *analogous* behavior in each context while $0 doesn't.
Anyhow, given the choice between an inconsistency that very few (if any) ask 
for in daily patching and one that a multitude of users have pleaded for in 
daily patching, I'm obviously in favor of the latter.

-Jonathan
  ___
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> 
https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] suggestion: $0 in messages

[Seb Shader via Pd-list]

>What is wrong with [my_selector(--[list]--[$1(


for instance, [42(--[list]--[$1( will give 42 not float,
similarly [symbol crabs(--[list]--[$1( will give crabs not symbol
Also it seems reasonable to just have 1 object box for querying a selector, 
which is a main element of the pd
message environment.





>> On the other hand, having $0 represent the selector would be the most 
>> consistent solution, because you can not get other patch-local variables
or 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?


here "solution" means a good way to resolve $0 in message boxes..
I don't think what users request is necessarily the end all of reasons to 
implement a feature in a language..



and again, the reason that $0 would be different in object boxes and message 
boxes is because everything else already is
different in object and message boxes

___
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> 
https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] suggestion: $0 in messages

[IOhannes m zmoelnig]

On 2018-04-05 13:44, Roman Haefeli wrote:
> I already pointed out that dollar variables
> are a totally different thing in messages and objects.

they are very much the same (from Pd's POV).

> 
>> whereas you cannot get an abstraction's selector (which would 
>> be handy for error reporting). 
> 
> What is the selector of an abstraction? 

the name of the abstraction.

fgmasr
dIOhannes



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> 
https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] suggestion: $0 in messages

[hans w. koch]

yes, great to say that, chris: thank you so much miller for the wonderful pure 
data!

hans

> Am 05.04.2018 um 12:53 schrieb Chris McCormick :
> 
> Anyway, I'm sorry to conjure up the spectacle of another several decades of 
> challenging software development and maintenance work. We probably don't say 
> this often enough around here: thank you very much for Pd, Miller.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Chris.


___
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> 
https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] suggestion: $0 in messages

[Chris McCormick]

On 03/04/18 03:02, Miller Puckette wrote:

shouldn't this be expanded into a full-on scripting language?


Heck yes! For audio vectors the dataflow paradigm is glorious. But 
building k-rate algorithms and logic with a mouse makes one i-rate (a 
bit weird to whinge about this when I choose to spend so much time doing 
it I'll admit).


This was my exact motivation for lolPd[1]. There are some very very 
little TCL implementations[2][3] which could map quite nicely to Pd. 
Another fun idea is a visual LISP-like such as Blockly[4].


Anyway, I'm sorry to conjure up the spectacle of another several decades 
of challenging software development and maintenance work. We probably 
don't say this often enough around here: thank you very much for Pd, Miller.


Cheers,

Chris.

[1] https://github.com/chr15m/lolPd
[2] https://github.com/zserge/partcl (600 lines of code!)
[3] https://wiki.tcl.tk/17975
[4] http://bpp.rs/blockly/apps/turtle/index.html?lang=en

--
http://mccormick.cx/

___
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> 
https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] suggestion: $0 in messages

[Chris McCormick]

On 03/04/18 21:52, Jonathan Wilkes via Pd-list wrote:

When users for a decade have said they wanted $0 in msg boxes,
they mean that they want to use Pd's notion of send-symbol locality
inside message boxes. They want that instead of manually querying
the value of a reserved dollarsign variable and sending that value
to the relevant message box in order to get "let" behavior.



Absolutely. Given some of Pd's other quirks the $0 issue seems like a 
funny time for semantic purity. The forks have given people what they want.


Cheers,

Chris.

--
http://mccormick.cx/

___
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> 
https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list