Confirming behavior of pattrstorage, priority, and bpatcher


    Apr 19 2008 | 3:05 am
    Hi,
    I'd like to confirm that the priority message for pattrstorage can be set for a subpatch/patcher object but *not* for a bpatcher object.
    I'll post an example if my question isn't clear.
    Thanks.
    Adam

    • Feb 01 2009 | 10:00 pm
      hi,
      I would like to ask, if this will be changed to the better in the not so far future???
      If we could build ui-patchers modularized with bpatchers and make use of the irreplaceable priority message the same time inside of these bpatchers!
      this would be something!
      all the best,
      johannes
    • Feb 02 2009 | 6:39 am
      maybe post an example. i'm not sure i understand the problem enough to investigate.
    • Feb 02 2009 | 9:27 pm
      I just tested this using the most recent version on my machine, and it works fine, so I think that this is an old bug report that was resolved at some point. If not, it will be resolved in the next release. :)
      jb
    • Feb 03 2009 | 10:02 am
      very very nice!
      will it be possible to change the sequence of the loading related to nested bpatchers with the priority message?
      if the bpatcher C at level "-3" (three levels "down" - bpatcher inside a bpatcher inside a bpatcher) has a priority of -5,
      will it values be loaded earlier than the values of bpatcher A at level "-1" with the priority of -2?
      will the bpatcher have to have a priority itself, or is it more important that the number boxes etc inside the bpatcher will have a appropriate priority.
      cheers,
      johannes s.
    • Feb 03 2009 | 10:13 am
      No. Ordering is still handled from the 'top down'. If you have a patch with two bpatchers (A and B), each containing 2 bpatchers (Aa, Ab, Ba, Bb):
      A priority 5
      Aa priority 4
      Ab priority 3
      B priority 2
      Ba priority 1
      Bb priority 0
      First B will be searched (it has the lowest priority at level 0). Bb will be restored, then Ba. Now we go to A, Ab will be restored, then Aa.
      jb
      Quote: sone wrote on Tue, 03 February 2009 11:02
      ----------------------------------------------------
      > very very nice!
      > will it be possible to change the sequence of the loading related to nested bpatchers with the priority message?
      > if the bpatcher C at level "-3" (three levels "down" - bpatcher inside a bpatcher inside a bpatcher) has a priority of -5,
      > will it values be loaded earlier than the values of bpatcher A at level "-1" with the priority of -2?
      > will the bpatcher have to have a priority itself, or is it more important that the number boxes etc inside the bpatcher will have a appropriate priority.
      > cheers,
      > johannes s.
      ----------------------------------------------------