Roald Baudoux

In the tutorial "Event Priority in Max (Scheduler vs. Queue)" (

https://cycling74.com/articles/event-priority-in-max-scheduler-vs-queue/),

 it is written: "Note that only the high priority scheduler maintains timing information, so if you wish to schedule a low priority event to execute at a specific time in the future, you will need to use the delay or pipe objects connected to the defer or deferlow objects."

I don't undestand whether one should place the delaying objet first or the deferring object first.

In the tutorial "Event Priority in Max (Scheduler vs. Queue)" (https://cycling74.com/articles/event-priority-in-max-scheduler-vs-queue/), it is written: "Note that only the high priority scheduler maintains timing information, so if you wish to schedule a low priority event to execute at a specific time in the future, you will need to use the delay or pipe objects connected to the defer or deferlow objects."

defer-delay-or-delay-defer-to-schedule-a-low-priority-event

according to the sentence that you quoted, since 

 deals with timing, we can securely assume that it's executing in the scheduler queue. This means that, regardless of the source of the bang that triggers the delay, the outlet of the 

 object will send stuff on the scheduler queue. Therefore, the correct order of getting a delayed bang (or anything else) in the low priority queue is:

according to the sentence that you quoted, since [delay] deals with timing, we can securely assume that it's executing in the scheduler queue. This means that, regardless of the source of the bang that triggers the delay, the outlet of the [delay] object will send stuff on the scheduler queue. Therefore, the correct order of getting a delayed bang (or anything else) in the low priority queue is:

defer -> delay or delay -> defer to schedule a low-priority event ?