BenCello

I was about to use the active object in Max5 exactly the same way I was using it in Max 4. But it seems that there are some new interactions between the "active status" and the appearance of the window.

I can't get the logic and links between the the "active status" and the "title/notitle" attribute for instance.

Please, have a look to the patch below and let me know if you have any answer !

I was about to use the active object in Max5 exactly the same way I was using it in Max 4. But it seems that there are some new interactions between the "active status" and the appearance of the window.
I can't get the logic and links between the the "active status" and the "title/notitle" attribute for instance.
Is it a bug ? Is it a feature ?

max5-active-object

It doesn't look like a bug for me, it seems the window is vanishing and 

reappearing, that's why you get all these messages...

If this poses a practical problem (which I can hardly imagine) you could 

gate the active output for a while, till the window is rebuilt...

BenCello schrieb:
> Is it a bug ? Is it a feature ?

It doesn't look like a bug for me, it seems the window is vanishing and 
reappearing, that's why you get all these messages...
If this poses a practical problem (which I can hardly imagine) you could 
gate the active output for a while, till the window is rebuilt...

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


I agree that it doesn't look like a bug. But it doesn't look like a feature either ! Why the window disappear and reappear when switching the title/notitle argument ? It is (as far as I tested) the only appearance attribute which has this effect...

I tried to gate the active object but I must have done it wrong, it wasn't working... I'll try again.

Then we could conclude that it is actually not the active object which is faulty but the title/notitle attribute which has a strange side-effect.

Does someone know some reason about that ?

After some other simple tests, I still have a problem with active (without changing anything of the window appearance)...

I am (or was in Max 4 should I say) using the active object to close a window as soon as it is not active with the simple patch:

However, I can't manage to do it in Max 5 because of a lot of "interferences" around the active object. 

Firstly when you save a patcher with the active object and open it, the first thing active report (almost at the same time as the loadbang) is "0" for inactive then (around 200 later) "1" for active. Which means that as soon as it is open, it bangs the wclose message. Impossible to use it without gate then... And if I gate it, then I have to wait at least 240ms after the opening to open the gate. And it is not even sure, I couldn't determine the precise timing. I guess it depends of the content of the patch also.

Unusable in this context... I don't know how the new interface and windows management of Max5 intefere with "active" but looks pretty buggy to me. Or I am too much of "active" object ?

After some other simple tests, I still have a problem with active (without changing anything of the window appearance)...
I am (or was in Max 4 should I say) using the active object to close a window as soon as it is not active with the simple patch:

However, I can't manage to do it in Max 5 because of a lot of "interferences" around the active object. 
Firstly when you save a patcher with the active object and open it, the first thing active report (almost at the same time as the loadbang) is "0" for inactive then (around 200 later) "1" for active. Which means that as soon as it is open, it bangs the wclose message. Impossible to use it without gate then... And if I gate it, then I have to wait at least 240ms after the opening to open the gate. And it is not even sure, I couldn't determine the precise timing. I guess it depends of the content of the patch also.

Unusable in this context... I don't know how the new interface and windows management of Max5 intefere with "active" but looks pretty buggy to me. Or I am too much of "active" object ?


BenCello schrieb:
> active->sel 0->wclose->thispatcher
>
> And this was working perfectly.

this workaround works perfectly indeed for what I wanted to do (I had totally forgotten about the "stop" message used with "delay").

Now, maybe Cycling should have a look on the working of "active" since the new Max 5 window rendering...

Thank you !
this workaround works perfectly indeed for what I wanted to do (I had totally forgotten about the "stop" message used with "delay").

[Max5] active object