more specific arguments in functions


    Oct 17 2006 | 9:11 am
    Is it possible (i guess yes) to specify a function to wait for (int,
    int, A_GIMME) arguments ?
    f.e
    --
    f.e chanfrault | aka | personal computer music
    > >>>>>> http://www.personal-computer-music.com
    > >>>>>> |sublime music for a desperate people|

    • Oct 17 2006 | 9:14 am
      Am 17.10.2006 um 11:11 schrieb f.e:
      > Is it possible (i guess yes) to specify a function to wait for
      > (int, int, A_GIMME) arguments ?
      It's all in A_GIMME, just verify the first two arguments to be int!
      greetings, Thomas
      --
      Thomas Grill
    • Oct 17 2006 | 9:17 am
      I knew but i wanted to shortcut the typechecking in the function itself ;-)
      BTW, my compiler deosn't like :
      if ((ac>=3) && (av[0]->a_type = A_LONG) && (av[1]->a_type = A_LONG))
      ...
      f.e
      f.e chanfrault | aka | personal computer music
      > >>>>>> http://www.personal-computer-music.com
      > >>>>>> |sublime music for a desperate people|
      Thomas Grill wrote:
      >
      > Am 17.10.2006 um 11:11 schrieb f.e:
      >
      >> Is it possible (i guess yes) to specify a function to wait for (int,
      >> int, A_GIMME) arguments ?
      >
      > It's all in A_GIMME, just verify the first two arguments to be int!
      > greetings, Thomas
      >
      > --
      > Thomas Grill
      > http://grrrr.org
      >
      >
      >
    • Oct 17 2006 | 9:23 am
      f.e wrote:
      > I knew but i wanted to shortcut the typechecking in the function itself ;-)
      >
      > BTW, my compiler deosn't like :
      >
      > if ((ac>=3) && (av[0]->a_type = A_LONG) && (av[1]->a_type = A_LONG))
      you mean == and not =, I guess....
      Olaf
    • Oct 17 2006 | 9:24 am
      Oh, same as Java indeed. But still not working... grrrrr
      f.e
      f.e chanfrault | aka | personal computer music
      > >>>>>> http://www.personal-computer-music.com
      > >>>>>> |sublime music for a desperate people|
      Olaf Matthes wrote:
      > f.e wrote:
      >
      >> I knew but i wanted to shortcut the typechecking in the function
      >> itself ;-)
      >>
      >> BTW, my compiler deosn't like :
      >>
      >> if ((ac>=3) && (av[0]->a_type = A_LONG) && (av[1]->a_type = A_LONG))
      >
      > you mean == and not =, I guess....
      >
      > Olaf
      >
    • Oct 17 2006 | 9:27 am
      Strange. In an old IRCAM source, i've found typechecking examples using
      switch(av->a_type), then in the Fujinaga, switch(av.a_type)... The last
      one works.
      f.e
      f.e chanfrault | aka | personal computer music
      > >>>>>> http://www.personal-computer-music.com
      > >>>>>> |sublime music for a desperate people|
      Olaf Matthes wrote:
      > f.e wrote:
      >
      >> I knew but i wanted to shortcut the typechecking in the function
      >> itself ;-)
      >>
      >> BTW, my compiler deosn't like :
      >>
      >> if ((ac>=3) && (av[0]->a_type = A_LONG) && (av[1]->a_type = A_LONG))
      >
      > you mean == and not =, I guess....
      >
      > Olaf
      >
    • Oct 17 2006 | 9:32 am
      It depends on whether you are working with a t_atom or a t_atom* --
      t_atom is a struct, whose members can be accessed with the .
      operator. t_atom* is a pointer to a struct, whose members can be
      accesses with the -> operator.
      jb
      Am 17.10.2006 um 11:27 schrieb f.e:
      > Strange. In an old IRCAM source, i've found typechecking examples
      > using switch(av->a_type), then in the Fujinaga, switch
      > (av.a_type)... The last one works.
    • Oct 17 2006 | 9:33 am
      On 10/17/06, f.e wrote:
      > Strange. In an old IRCAM source, i've found typechecking examples using
      > switch(av->a_type), then in the Fujinaga, switch(av.a_type)... The last
      > one works.
      The difference here depends on what av is.
      i.e.:
      t_atom av[1];
      av->a_type
      or
      t_atom av;
      av.a_type
      wes
    • Oct 17 2006 | 9:34 am
      Jinx!
      On 10/17/06, Jeremy Bernstein wrote:
      > It depends on whether you are working with a t_atom or a t_atom* --
      > t_atom is a struct, whose members can be accessed with the .
      > operator. t_atom* is a pointer to a struct, whose members can be
      > accesses with the -> operator.
      >
      > jb
      >
      > Am 17.10.2006 um 11:27 schrieb f.e:
      >
      > > Strange. In an old IRCAM source, i've found typechecking examples
      > > using switch(av->a_type), then in the Fujinaga, switch
      > > (av.a_type)... The last one works.
      >
      >
    • Oct 17 2006 | 9:42 am
      I thought about something with this flavor... Thanks a lot, it's clearer
      now.
      best regards
      f.e
      f.e chanfrault | aka | personal computer music
      > >>>>>> http://www.personal-computer-music.com
      > >>>>>> |sublime music for a desperate people|
      Jeremy Bernstein wrote:
      > It depends on whether you are working with a t_atom or a t_atom* --
      > t_atom is a struct, whose members can be accessed with the . operator.
      > t_atom* is a pointer to a struct, whose members can be accesses with
      > the -> operator.
      >
      > jb
      >
      > Am 17.10.2006 um 11:27 schrieb f.e:
      >
      >> Strange. In an old IRCAM source, i've found typechecking examples
      >> using switch(av->a_type), then in the Fujinaga, switch(av.a_type)...
      >> The last one works.
      >
      >