fraction

Have any of you ever had this kind of thing happen to you?

When I copy a basic object from another patch, and paste it into a new patch, this new patch takes an anormal size, while this simple same object created in a new patch and saved as is, is only 1kb. I come up with crazy differences like patches that should be 45kb and instead are 450kb.

When opening the patcher (the big one) with a text file, it's like it's copying the whole configuration. This is the first time I've noticed this. The worst is that if you erase everything in that patch, it keeps that anormal size. It does make any sens. What could be the problem?

To be more precise, object that make big patches are copied from patcher that are used as bpatcher in higher architecture. Could that be related to that?

example below with a patch with 1 inlet that is 1kb, and a patch with 1 inlet copied from another that is much more. 

normal.maxpat

big.maxpat

When I copy a basic object from another patch, and paste it into a new patch, this new patch takes an anormal size, while this simple same object created in a new patch and saved as is, is only 1kb. I come up with crazy differences like patches that should be 45kb and instead are 450kb. 

When opening the patcher (the big one) with a text file, it's like it's copying the whole configuration.  This is the first time I've noticed this. The worst is that if you erase everything in that patch, it keeps that anormal size. It does make any sens. What could be the problem?

example below with a patch with 1 inlet that is 1kb, and a patch with 1 inlet copied from another that is much more. 


Hi,
Have any of you ever had this kind of thing happen to you?
When I copy a basic object from another patch, and paste it into a new patch,

copywaste-weird-behavior

https://cycling74.com/forums/style-problems

image.png

Naaan seriously? i have been using max for years now, and first time 

1) i encounter such problem with patch size, or i get aware that there might be a problem with their size. I assume as long you stay within max, and with small patcher, you never realize it.

2) that i hear about this issue and this solution ! Thx a lot.

A basic patch for instance sees its size changing from 450ko to 19ko. How's that even possible? that's such a technical issue! why cycling74 doesn't do anything about that? it's serious!

for a m4l device that uses like 40 patcher or abstraction underneath, it implies an unacceptable difference!

thx again, i now have to run like 200 patches through this to check if all goes well.

Naaan seriously? i have been using max for years now, and first time 
1) i encounter such problem with patch size, or i get aware that there might be a problem with their size. I assume as long you stay within max, and with small patcher, you never realize it.

2) that i hear about this issue and this solution ! Thx a lot. 

A basic patch for instance sees its size changing from 450ko to 19ko. How's that even possible? that's such a technical issue! why cycling74 doesn't do anything about that? it's serious! 

for a m4l device that uses like 40 patcher or abstraction underneath, it implies an unacceptable difference! 

thx again, i now have to run  like 200 patches through this to check if all goes well.

You guys don't imagine how much this style remover patcher improve my patcher performances. That's insane.

If you don't give some attention, it can just kill all you effort .

You guys don't imagine how much this style remover patcher improve my patcher performances. That's insane.
 If you don't give some attention, it can just kill all you effort .

copy/waste weird behavior