Forums > MaxMSP

access a named object?

May 27, 2007 | 2:39 pm

hi

i want to access a numbox, named "foo" without using a [receive] object

I can do it by [script send foo $1] send to [thispatcher]

but i thought i also could send its value with a message box, something like

[; foo 45] – but then max says foo:no such object….

can’t a message box send a message to anything else than "receive"
??? it seems to me as a very "ircam-esque" way to send messages to
named objects….

or am i wrong??

(yes, and most probably i should also be able to do it with
pattr-family objects – will ahve a look at it just now)

many thanks

kasper

Kasper T. Toeplitz
noise, composition, bass, computer

http://www.sleazeArt.com

http://www.myspace.com/sleazeart


May 27, 2007 | 3:24 pm


May 27, 2007 | 3:28 pm


May 27, 2007 | 5:37 pm

Quote: Kasper T Toeplitz wrote on Sun, 27 May 2007 08:39
—————————————————-
> hi
>
> i want to access a numbox, named "foo" without using a [receive] object
>
> I can do it by [script send foo $1] send to [thispatcher]
>
> but i thought i also could send its value with a message box, something like
>
> [; foo 45] – but then max says foo:no such object….
>

hehe yes, the inlets of the object do not know that the
objects is called "foo".

when you look at the message you tried

"; foo 45"

you will also find that you did not specify to which inlet
of "foo" you would like to send it anyway; because you cant
specify it by sending messages this way.

whats wrong with scripting to [thispatcher]?
for the price of one connection you get patcher-independant
funcitons. oh yeah i know … useless for named objects. :)

the use of [universal] is fun where it applies, but with
names such things do not work, which i why i dont use named
objects.
named objects would be more fun if objects could
have the same name so that you can freely groups of objects.
thats probably too much asked from aprogramming enviroment.

-110


May 27, 2007 | 6:07 pm

pattrforward is the simplest answer to this question, i think.

jb

Am 27.05.2007 um 19:37 schrieb Roman Thilenius:

>
> Quote: Kasper T Toeplitz wrote on Sun, 27 May 2007 08:39
> —————————————————-
>> hi
>>
>> i want to access a numbox, named "foo" without using a [receive]
>> object
>>
>> I can do it by [script send foo $1] send to [thispatcher]
>>
>> but i thought i also could send its value with a message box,
>> something like
>>
>> [; foo 45] – but then max says foo:no such object….
>>
>
>
> hehe yes, the inlets of the object do not know that the
> objects is called "foo".
>
>
> when you look at the message you tried
>
> "; foo 45"
>
> you will also find that you did not specify to which inlet
> of "foo" you would like to send it anyway; because you cant
> specify it by sending messages this way.
>
>
> whats wrong with scripting to [thispatcher]?
> for the price of one connection you get patcher-independant
> funcitons. oh yeah i know … useless for named objects. :)
>
>
> the use of [universal] is fun where it applies, but with
> names such things do not work, which i why i dont use named
> objects.
> named objects would be more fun if objects could
> have the same name so that you can freely groups of objects.
> thats probably too much asked from aprogramming enviroment.
>
>
> -110
>
>
>
>
> –
> http://vst-mac.info/



jln
May 27, 2007 | 6:26 pm


May 28, 2007 | 6:09 pm

Roman Thilenius schrieb:
> named objects would be more fun if objects could
> have the same name so that you can freely groups of objects.
> thats probably too much asked from aprogramming enviroment.

I have solutions for that, the only restriction is that you have to
follow a naming convention like name them foo[1], foo[2] (which happens
actually automatically while duplicating), then uzi the value to all of
them with pattrforward…

Without names and pattr I’d be lost… (I can’t imagine having patched
before it arrived, each and every old patch I look at seems ugly without
names… ;-)

Oh–, I forgot only the iPhone post should have been taken seriously…

Stefan


Stefan Tiedje————x——-
–_____———–|————–
–(_|_ —-|—–|—–()——-
– _|_)—-|—–()————–
———-()——–www.ccmix.com


May 29, 2007 | 6:17 am

>>
>>
>>i want to access a numbox, named "foo" without using a [receive] object
>
>Doesn’t [pvar] do the job for you ?
>If not, try [pattrforward]
>
pvar – i didi not know!! wow great, does all i need

pattrforward seems a good solution as well

many thanks

kasper

Kasper T. Toeplitz
noise, composition, bass, computer

http://www.sleazeArt.com

http://www.myspace.com/sleazeart


Viewing 8 posts - 1 through 8 (of 8 total)