sends in poly~


    Oct 31 2010 | 10:01 am
    howdy!
    if I have a send in a patch (let's call it "sendpatch"), and then I have 5 of them via poly (so poly~ sendpatch 5),
    does poly number those sends for each instance?
    or, if not, what does poly do with those sends? Does each instance have the same send?
    thanks!

    • Oct 31 2010 | 10:59 am
      > does poly number those sends for each instance?
      No.
      > or, if not, what does poly do with those sends?
      Nothing.
      > Does each instance have the same send?
      Tricky question. Each instance has a it's own unique send. A send/receive pair can basically be understood as a patch chord, which is not actually drawn. This allows to easily connect across the boundary of sub patches and poly~'s. If you require unique sends for each poly, you could use the forward object instead. Does this cover the issue?
      _
      johan
    • Oct 31 2010 | 12:16 pm
      Each instance of poly~ has a index number so if you give eveny receive object in the poly~ that same number (see helpfile how to do this) you can address every poly~ separate. Not very difficult to do.
    • Oct 31 2010 | 12:35 pm
      If you want to have a uniquely named [send] in each instance of your [poly~] subpatch I would recommend some combination of [thispoly~] to get the instance number, [sprintf] for formatting, and [forward] to do the sending.
      lh
    • Oct 31 2010 | 8:45 pm
      or [thispoly~] for the number, prepend it to your [send] messages, then route out the index at the other end.
    • Oct 31 2010 | 9:12 pm
      Hey everybody -
      thanks, looks good. I suppose the heart of my question was to find out if there was some nifty way of having individual sends in a poly~ self-define, without having to address/define the sends myself. I kind of expected one could not, which is fine.
      -thom
    • Nov 01 2010 | 12:50 pm
      I would rather use a #0 prefix for the send/receive name. This will be substituted with a _unique_ id number per subpatch/poly-instance.
      With the instance number approach you might run into trouble when using multiple poly objects, as there will be multiple instances with the same instance number.
      Using #0 is also a cleaner solution, as you can directly use it in the arguments.
      for example:
      [send #0-var1]
      [receive #0-var1]