Forums > Jitter

Confirming behavior of pattrstorage, priority, and bpatcher

April 19, 2008 | 3:05 am

Hi,

I’d like to confirm that the priority message for pattrstorage can be set for a subpatch/patcher object but *not* for a bpatcher object.

I’ll post an example if my question isn’t clear.

Thanks.

Adam


February 1, 2009 | 10:00 pm

hi,
I would like to ask, if this will be changed to the better in the not so far future???
If we could build ui-patchers modularized with bpatchers and make use of the irreplaceable priority message the same time inside of these bpatchers!
this would be something!
all the best,
johannes


February 2, 2009 | 6:39 am

maybe post an example. i’m not sure i understand the problem enough to investigate.


February 2, 2009 | 9:27 pm

I just tested this using the most recent version on my machine, and it works fine, so I think that this is an old bug report that was resolved at some point. If not, it will be resolved in the next release. :)

jb


February 3, 2009 | 10:02 am

very very nice!
will it be possible to change the sequence of the loading related to nested bpatchers with the priority message?
if the bpatcher C at level "-3" (three levels "down" – bpatcher inside a bpatcher inside a bpatcher) has a priority of -5,
will it values be loaded earlier than the values of bpatcher A at level "-1" with the priority of -2?
will the bpatcher have to have a priority itself, or is it more important that the number boxes etc inside the bpatcher will have a appropriate priority.
cheers,
johannes s.


February 3, 2009 | 10:13 am

No. Ordering is still handled from the ‘top down’. If you have a patch with two bpatchers (A and B), each containing 2 bpatchers (Aa, Ab, Ba, Bb):

A priority 5
Aa priority 4
Ab priority 3

B priority 2
Ba priority 1
Bb priority 0

First B will be searched (it has the lowest priority at level 0). Bb will be restored, then Ba. Now we go to A, Ab will be restored, then Aa.

jb

Quote: sone wrote on Tue, 03 February 2009 11:02
—————————————————-
> very very nice!
> will it be possible to change the sequence of the loading related to nested bpatchers with the priority message?
> if the bpatcher C at level "-3" (three levels "down" – bpatcher inside a bpatcher inside a bpatcher) has a priority of -5,
> will it values be loaded earlier than the values of bpatcher A at level "-1" with the priority of -2?
> will the bpatcher have to have a priority itself, or is it more important that the number boxes etc inside the bpatcher will have a appropriate priority.
> cheers,
> johannes s.
—————————————————-


Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)