Cycling 74 » Topic: Time value syntax: why not [line]? http://cycling74.com/forums/topic/time-value-syntax-why-not-line/feed Wed, 19 Jun 2013 23:56:42 +0000 http://bbpress.org/?v=2.2.4 http://cycling74.com/forums/topic/time-value-syntax-why-not-line/#post-37572 <![CDATA[Time value syntax: why not [line]?]]> http://cycling74.com/forums/topic/time-value-syntax-why-not-line/#post-37572 Mon, 05 May 2008 23:29:47 +0000 Jean-Francois Charles

]]> http://cycling74.com/forums/topic/time-value-syntax-why-not-line/#post-129926 <![CDATA[Re: Time value syntax: why not [line]?]]> http://cycling74.com/forums/topic/time-value-syntax-why-not-line/#post-129926 Tue, 06 May 2008 04:49:49 +0000 David Zicarelli > Why doesn’t [line] accept messages like |200 4n|, whereas [line~] likes the
> new time value system?

This is the least of the line object’s problems, all of which we hope to address in a future update.

David Z.

]]> http://cycling74.com/forums/topic/time-value-syntax-why-not-line/#post-129927 <![CDATA[Re: Time value syntax: why not [line]?]]> http://cycling74.com/forums/topic/time-value-syntax-why-not-line/#post-129927 Tue, 06 May 2008 14:14:18 +0000 Jean-Francois Charles >> Why doesn’t [line] accept messages like |200 4n|, whereas [line~] likes the
>> new time value system?
>
> This is the least of the line object’s problems, all of which we hope to
> address in a future update.
>
> David Z.
>
Great news!
Thanks for the answer.
J-F.

]]> http://cycling74.com/forums/topic/time-value-syntax-why-not-line/#post-129928 <![CDATA[Re: Time value syntax: why not [line]?]]> http://cycling74.com/forums/topic/time-value-syntax-why-not-line/#post-129928 Tue, 06 May 2008 15:27:54 +0000 Bas van der Graaff Great stuff!
I could start using lines again when that happens. ATM everything is done with (q)metro.

]]>