Exclude vars from autopattr by name.


    Mar 05 2008 | 1:45 am
    Dear all,
    Is it possible to exclude stuff from autopattr by name? I have objects all over the place and it's very difficult/messy to get the autopattr "exclude" wire connected to all of them.
    'active foo 0' on pattrstorage doesnt do the same thing.
    - Glot

    • Mar 05 2008 | 3:13 am
      i don't think so.
      i would recommend going the other way around. name the things you want in autopattr, and don't name what you don't want. keep autoname 0 and you'll get just the named objects in the pattr.
      the pattr stuff is great, but you kind of have to incorporate it from the ground up. sometimes it's hard to just shove it into an existing application and get good results.
    • Mar 05 2008 | 3:16 am
      On Mar 4, 2008, at 5:45 PM, Glot wrote:
      > Is it possible to exclude stuff from autopattr by name? I have
      > objects all over the place and it's very difficult/messy to get the
      > autopattr "exclude" wire connected to all of them.
      Do the object you're trying to exclude have to be named? If not, just
      get rid of their names, and they will disappear from the pattr world.
      Chris Muir
      cbm@well.com
    • Mar 05 2008 | 3:45 am
      Yes, the objects I'm excluding are named.
      Here's some patchers to demonstrate where the problem arises. It's a local send and receive system using pattr.
      guid.pat:
      ls.pat:
      lr.pat:
      and in the top-level patch, you put:
      ...
      Now this is the only possible way I was able to get a GUID from child patches, because 'pv' doesn't work with upwards scope when it's saved in a file. pv only works in subpatchers. So I had to use the pattr system here.
      The problem is that when changing presets, all the GUID's get all messed up, and set to various different values that were in the GUID's at different moments in time. And there's no way to exclude the pattr from downlevel scope from the 'pattr' object itself (like @exclude 1) -- if that worked I could just exclude it from at the LS and LR patch.
      I have local sends and receives everywhere, so adding them to 'active foo 0' mode would involve me making a nasty list from dynamic names and constantly adding new entries to it. It doesn't help to do what rob mentioned, cause even if I add them one by one, the pattr objects in the LS and LR patches get added in automatically.
      - Glot