Brian H.

In the excerpt from a patch below, it appears that a list that comes from [patcherargs] is somehow treated different than a list that comes from [msg]. I know there is some peculiarity with lists that start with numbers, but I can't figure out why [route] would treat a list differently, based on the object it comes from. Please let me know if there's something further I can clarify about the situation.

Hi,
In the excerpt from a patch below, it appears that a list that comes from [patcherargs] is somehow treated different than a list that comes from [msg].  I know there is some peculiarity with lists that start with numbers, but I can't figure out why [route] would treat a list differently, based on the object it comes from.  Please let me know if there's something further I can clarify about the situation.

odd-route-issue

Attribute names are symbols, not integers. Thus, they come out of patcherargs as symbols, not as integers. The route object tries to compare the symbol '-1' with the number -1 and the test fails. This revision of your example demonstrates. (Note that everything comes out the right outlet of route.)

Ah, great thanks! I vaguely thought it might be something like that. So [unpack] is a reliable way to see what data-type Max thinks something is? For troubleshooting, I've often looked for a way to get it to be explicit about how it is interpreting something, but not sure if there's a specific tool or recommended way to do that, especially given some of the object quirks (some tolerate lists starting with numbers, some don't, etc.).

Ah, great thanks!  I vaguely thought it might be something like that.  So [unpack] is a reliable way to see what data-type Max thinks something is?  For troubleshooting, I've often looked for a way to get it to be explicit about how it is interpreting something, but not sure if there's a specific tool or recommended way to do that, especially given some of the object quirks (some tolerate lists starting with numbers, some don't, etc.).


Odd [route] issue...