seejayjames

Hello all, I'm sure there is a truly simple answer to this. I have a fader (or a slider, or just a number, for that matter) in a patch that is reflected in a subpatch. When I change the value in the main patch I send the value to the subpatch and update the corresponding one. However, if I do the same with the subpatch slider, I get a stack overflow, for fairly obvious reasons.

I imagine there's an easy way to do this with set? or perhaps a pack that only bangs once in awhile? I'm just not getting it...

stack-overflow-question

in a situation like that you have only one option:

do "set" in both directions between the two, and

then connect _both of them to where you want to 

even if it might not be neccessary in any cases it 

will make sure you do not loose oversight.

do "set" in both directions between the two, and
then connect _both of them to where you want to 
control soemthing by them.

even if it might not be neccessary in any cases it 
will make sure you do not loose oversight.


Thanks for the response. Here's what I found, somewhat to my surprise:

Number boxes, the original "outdated" vertical slider, the horizontal slider, the signal level faders, and the picture-based controls all need a set message to avoid the stack overflow when connecting two together in a "loop". The picture-based slider does not! I don't know why the implementation was different, but that's what I found.

I was replacing my signal-level faders with prettier ones and wanted to be sure I could keep the levels the same within subpatches or master-patches. Also wound up using hidden signal-level faders to do the actual audio scaling, as simply multiplying the signal by moving floating-point numbers causes audio "fuzz" or clicks. The signal level faders have that great built-in adjustable slew to avoid that... nice.

Stack overflow question