feature request for grab

Aug 16, 2006 at 8:13am

feature request for grab

I have a feature request for grab:

It would be great if grab could address an object directly by the object
name. [grab 1 objectname] would send at the moment the message to a
receive object and then grab the output of the directly connected
object. If it could just grab the output of an object with that name
would be great.
This change cannot break existing patches, as its impossible to have a
receive object with the same name as the name of another object.

Stefan


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

#27181
Aug 16, 2006 at 1:40pm

This would have great advantage for me. This would solve the problem that the receive always has to be in the same patcher as the object. When you want to put the receive in an abstraction, the grab tries to grab the outlet.

One solution would be to ignore outlets when resolving the object to grab, but directly entering the object name would work too..

It would be essential to be able to name objects dynamically, though. Perhaps this could simply be done by sending a dedicated general naming message to an object?

..an obscure message that no-one ever used in his externals? Hmm..

Mattijs

#82036
Aug 16, 2006 at 1:41pm

This would have one great advantage for me. It would solve the problem that the receive always has to be in the same patcher as the object. When you want to put the receive in an abstraction, the grab tries to grab the outlet.

One solution would be to ignore outlets when resolving the object to grab, but directly entering the object name would work too..

It would be essential to be able to name objects dynamically, though. Perhaps this could simply be done by sending a dedicated general naming message to an object?

..an obscure message that no-one ever used in his externals? Hmm..

Mattijs

#82037
Aug 17, 2006 at 4:19pm

Mattijs Kneppers wrote:
> This would have one great advantage for me. It would solve the
> problem that the receive always has to be in the same patcher as the
> object. When you want to put the receive in an abstraction, the grab
> tries to grab the outlet.

It would be even better if named objects could be adressed like in
pattrforward, allowing grabbing across subpatchers…

It would make grab a much more utilised object. I see it rarely in
patches, but its really a very usefull idea.

Or Jeremy just creates a new pattrgrab which does it, but I think a
modified grab would be better, as it could still do what it did before
and no old patches are compromised…

Stefan


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

#82038

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.