Forums > MaxMSP

sending same message to different [receive] objects


flim
Apr 30 2010 | 5:40 pm

…one by one – a [forward] task?

cheers!

-jonas

— Pasted Max Patch, click to expand. —

Jesse
Apr 30 2010 | 8:51 pm

pattrforward may be a better approach – no receive objects, clearly defined hierarchical namespace.


Hans Höglund
Apr 30 2010 | 8:58 pm

Or use a single receive object name combined with route.


flim
Apr 30 2010 | 10:07 pm

thanks for the replies! but I guess both approaches won’t do – at least not fully (for the [route] method simply loses in its looks, hehe).

I guess I’ll stick to my [sprintf] [forward] combination. thank you anyways!

all the best

-j

— Pasted Max Patch, click to expand. —

Hans Höglund
Apr 30 2010 | 11:31 pm

To be clear, I meant putting one route object in each subpatch. I often use a code style like that to simulate a "namespace hierarchy".

I usually avoid the pattr objects as I believe they have some fundamental design mistakes.

For example:

— Pasted Max Patch, click to expand. —

I might add that generating symbol names through sprint is necessary in other circumstances, for instance generating unique names for colls and buffers inside abstractions.

I still believe that you should minimize the number of global symbols you use though, especially for receive objects.

Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)
Forums > MaxMSP