Forums > MaxMSP

addressing inlets with pattrforward

March 22, 2006 | 1:41 pm

Just a quickie –
Could anyone advise me on the possibility of using a pattrforward object, bound to a switch object in another patcher, to address in0 of the switch object, in order to remotely switch. I have tried the ‘in0′ message into the bound pattrforward, but I am always presented with a ‘bad inlet specified’ message.
The manual seems a little ‘light’ on information about this feature. It would appear to me that a message ‘in0 1′ sent to the pattrforward object would switch the switch to position 1, but it doesn’t.
Any help would be most gratefully received
regards
leigh


March 22, 2006 | 1:49 pm

Thanks, I can confirm some kind of a problem. I’ll post a fix in the
near future.

jb


March 22, 2006 | 1:54 pm

wow –
thanks for the quick reply….
I thought I was going mad trying all sorts of message combinations!
…you saved me from completely replanning a particularly large switching setup!
regards
leigh


March 22, 2006 | 10:07 pm

So, there’s good news and bad news. The good news (for me) is that the
bug is not in pattrforward. The bad news (for you) is that the bug is in
the switch object, and because the switch object is an internal object,
you’ll have to wait until the next release of Max before this will work
properly. The good news (for you) is that there’s a workaround: send a
float instead of an int to the switch object and it’ll work fine.

However, I’m not getting the "bad inlet specified" message — I’m
getting a message about "int" having too many arguments. Can you verify
that a) the problem is limited to the switch object and b) that the
messages "1" and "int 1", as well as "1.", "float 1." and "in0 1." work?

If not, my object is a little newer than yours and I can post an update,
if necessary.

jb


March 23, 2006 | 12:48 am

Quote: Jeremy Bernstein wrote on Wed, 22 March 2006 22:07
—————————————————-
> So, there’s good news and bad news. The good news (for me) is that the
> bug is not in pattrforward.

i see…….hmmmmmmm :-(

> The bad news (for you) is that the bug is in
> the switch object, and because the switch object is an internal object,
> you’ll have to wait until the next release of Max before this will work
> properly. The good news (for you) is that there’s a workaround: send a
> float instead of an int to the switch object and it’ll work fine.

Hurray! – i just tried that and inlet message now works great, with floats as you instructed!!

> However, I’m not getting the "bad inlet specified" message — I’m
> getting a message about "int" having too many arguments. Can you verify
> that a) the problem is limited to the switch object and b) that the
> messages "1" and "int 1", as well as "1.", "float 1." and "in0 1." work?

B)
"1" warns of extra arguments but works
"int 1" warns of extra arguments but works
"1." works fine
"float 1." works fine
"in0 1." works fine

A) I only got to test with counter object so far, but integers work fine with it. I shall let you know if I come across any others in my maxpatcherwilderness!

I had tried to set the switch with a integer number box value, which seemed to jolt things erratically around, though a floating point number box works fine.
My bad inlet message was only when, through trial and error, I sent a message that was only ‘in0′ with no number following it.

> If not, my object is a little newer than yours and I can post an update,
> if necessary.

Thanks, but it seems all is good here. It’s no problem for me to use floating point messages/number boxes to remotely set the switches.
Many thanks again for your attention and time
regards
leigh


Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)