johnpitcairn

Throws an error in Max 5: "args: requires additional argument"

Shouldn't poly~ see the attribute as an argument?

We're using this to pass scoping information down to oo objects inside a poly~ (which didn't complain in Max 4). It still works in Max 5, but the error is unexpected.

Shouldn't poly~ see the attribute as an argument? 

We're using this to pass scoping information down to oo objects inside a poly~ (which didn't complain in Max 4). It still works in Max 5, but the error is unexpected.


bug-poly-args-throws-error-if-only-attributes-supplied

IcedDragon wrote on Tue, 19 May 2009 20:29

Thanks, but it's not an option if you're trying to use oo objects inside a scoped poly instance - you need the @oo to tell the oo objects where the scope is.

The workaround is to supply an extra, useless, "real" argument, ie

But then if you're using an oo constructor object (or patcherargs), you'll get that extra arg output rather than just a bang, which means you may have to allow for that if your abstraction is in a poly~ (and you don't want the error) vs in a simple box (where there is no error).

Given Max 4 didn't complain about this, why should Max 5?

IcedDragon wrote on Tue, 19 May 2009 20:29hi,
Try remove the "@".
Like this [poly~ oo.ping 5 args oo subs]

Given Max 4 didn't complain about this, why should Max 5?


johnpitcairn wrote on Wed, 20 May 2009 06:22

In Max 4 patcherargs inside of poly~ didn't work at all. Something had been fixed but not completely. And pfft~ which had the same problem isn't fixed at all...

johnpitcairn wrote on Wed, 20 May 2009 06:22Given Max 4 didn't complain about this, why should Max 5?

Bug? Poly~ args throws error if only attributes supplied