Dictionary:embedInStream requires inval to be a Dictionary, why?

Is there a good reason for the following discrepancy?

p = Prand([(a: 1), (a: 2)], inf).asStream;

p.next;  // ok
p.next(());  // ok
p.next(0);  // Message 'putAll' not understood.

The current logic assumes that there is never any reason for a pattern
to return an event, other than to insert the returned the event's
values into the event being passed in. While Dictionary:embedInStream
allows inval to be nil, it strictly requires that any other inval
absolutely must be a dictionary, no exception allowed.

But I did have a case just now where I needed to pass a number into a
stream, but the stream needs to return events that are being used as
object prototypes.

Currently, this use case is forbidden, and I can't see a good reason
why. I worked around it by passing the numeric value conditionally,
but... I dunno, it seems a bit rude of Dictionary:embedInStream to
behave this way.

^if(event.isNil) { this } { event.copy.putAll(this) }.yield

Should this not be as follows?

^if(event.respondsTo(\putAll)) { event.copy.putAll(this) } { this }.yield

hjh

_______________________________________________
sc-dev mailing list

info (subscription, etc.): http://www.birmingham.ac.uk/facilities/ea-studios/research/supercollider/mailinglist.aspx
archive: http://www.listarc.bham.ac.uk/marchives/sc-dev/
search: http://www.listarc.bham.ac.uk/lists/sc-dev/search/