Re: [approve, 3.3] Node:map backward compat fix

> On Friday 24 April 2009 03:55:43 Scott Wilson wrote:
>> Ah, the mixture of object and messaging styles rears its head once
>> again.
>>
>> Sorry this is my fault. I had meant when updating Node:map to use
>> asBus. I think what happened is that I got a little hung up on the
>> rate issue with asBus, and forgot to resolve it in the end.
>>
>> Making audio busses mappable definitely makes the existing semantics
>> murkier if we're going to allow integers in map. So I think we have
>> two choices: Either we go back to the idea of separate mapa method,  
>> or
>> do as James suggests below and just make it crystal clear that ints
>> always become control busses.
>>
>> The former idea has the advantage that it makes it clear what will
>> happen to ints, and gets rid of the slight ugliness of a possible
>> double message from mapMsg. The latter has the convenience of  
>> allowing
>> for mapping both audio and control busses in the same call.
>>
>> Given the desire to continue to allow Integers, I think maybe the
>> first option is cleaner. Opinions?
>
> I think it could be a mix of the two.
> Have a mapa method for if people want to explicitly map to an audio  
> bus (and
> they can use an integer for it too).
> And have map also check for the rate and delegate to mapa in case it  
> finds an
> audio bus.

>
>
> then we would also need to keep a mapn and a mapan, in case people  
> want to
> specify explicitly the number of channels of a bus, instead of  
> inferring it
> from the Bus object.
>
>
>> Of course in an ideal world Object style would have been worked out  
>> at
>> the start to only allow Bus objects if you're referring to a bus.
>
>> Actually in an ideal world you wouldn't need map at all, and could do
>> everything with set. The only reason we still need map really is
>> because of In and Out UGens. I'm not sure if there is a way of
>> cleaning that up that would allow backwards compatibility, but that
>> might be worth thinking about for 3.4.
>
> hmmm... not sure about that...