s/r breeding in poly~


    Mar 10 2008 | 1:26 pm
    Perhaps I've just never noticed this before, but I can't help thinking
    it's causing some problem for me right now. If you have s/r pairs in
    a poly~ with #0 or #1 args, twice as many appear in the popup menu as
    actually exist:
    Take patch 1 below (lotsa_sends):
    max v2;
    Open it up in here:
    max v2;
    and double-click on any of the s/r objects, and it claims that twice
    as many sends and receives exist as actually do. Is this purely
    cosmetic, or is something weird going on?
    M

    • Mar 10 2008 | 2:27 pm
      > If you have s/r pairs in
      > a poly~ with #0 or #1 args, twice as many appear in the popup menu as
      > actually exist
      More accurately is two extra. With a polyphony of 2 the #1 locations dont add up to 8 but 6. By releasing the mouse over one of them, you are taken to it's location. There you see that it all doesn't work so proper. My guess is that this was never well implemented within the context of poly~ because it might have proven too difficult within the existing context. I might be wrong.
      > Perhaps I've just never noticed this before, but I can't help thinking
      > it's causing some problem for me right now.
      Do you get any weird stuff?
      _
      johan
    • Mar 10 2008 | 5:37 pm
      I'm in #1-arg hell right now, so just trying to get things under
      control, but I don't think so. I agree -- I expect it was never 100%
      on, but I can't tie anything directly to it.
      M
      On Mar 10, 2008, at 15:27, jvkr wrote:
      >
      >> If you have s/r pairs in
      >> a poly~ with #0 or #1 args, twice as many appear in the popup menu as
      >> actually exist
      >
      > More accurately is two extra. With a polyphony of 2 the #1 locations
      > dont add up to 8 but 6. By releasing the mouse over one of them, you
      > are taken to it's location. There you see that it all doesn't work
      > so proper. My guess is that this was never well implemented within
      > the context of poly~ because it might have proven too difficult
      > within the existing context. I might be wrong.
      >
      >
      >> Perhaps I've just never noticed this before, but I can't help
      >> thinking
      >> it's causing some problem for me right now.
      >
      > Do you get any weird stuff?
      >
      > _
      > johan