Note: following question is not a hidden feature request. It is only a question. I’m curious.
@StochasticTelegraph There isn’t any way to loop through the sockets by a ‘for’ loop, is there?
Just to show a simplified example what I mean:
for i=0 to 5
out1+i=nx[random(0,9)]
next
(Thank you for the not-a-request note.)
No, there is not.
And there’s a perhaps unwelcome surprise in your shorter for-loop version, in that a NEXT has a implied WAIT 0 in it, meaning that the for-loop version would only update, say, out1, every six samples, whereas the flat version will update every sample. Depending on desired outcome, that might be an issue.
I put in the implied WAIT 0 into loops because I didn’t want to make it too easy to stall or stutter Rack by naively taking a long time while iterating over a For loop. But it’s non-obvious at times.
Chances for ‘functionnal programming’ in roadmap?
If you mean a true functional language, like a Haskell, Erlang, Scheme, or LISP, mmmm, that would certainly be a different module, and, I would currently expect, one with a far smaller potential audience. But I’d be curious what an example or two of that would look like, in your imagining.
If you instead mean being able to define and then call functions, that seems a lot more tractable, and I’ve certainly encountered the desire for that myself. I don’t relish the thought of trying to explain and document variable name spaces and countless other issues functions could introduce, but functions sure would be nice sometimes…
Javascript is a perfectly usable functional language, isn’t it? Aren’t there any JS modules for VCV? Or was that only in some never updated module?
Are you thinking of this?
It looks like this was less an attempt to surface JS to the user and more to use it within the module’s code?
Yeah, I was thinking more of this:
Yeah - I’ve never understood why that has not been ported to V2. A lot can be done with docB Formula One and BASICally, but VCV Prototype had some nice features that I miss. In particular was the ability to format and display multi-line text.
Absent any actual information on motivations, I can imagine a few reasons:
Again, this is just me speculating from afar.
Not used ‘prototype’,but seriously,good idea module
Lua jit,VUlt,Faust,Super Collider
I’m going to bet your are wrong on this. Shall we say $5?
Well, @Squinky, you’re far closer to the source of these decisions than I am, so I’d imagine you are far more knowledgeable than I on this point. So while I love wagering on beliefs, I’m not convinced this is an equal knowledge bet. I would not be at all surprised to be mistaken. Note my business card from my previous job:
Also, given that this question has been raised a few times with no answer from the Rack gods, I’m also concerned that it’ll never be answered, so the wager would remain in limbo, unsatisfyingly.
If you have theories as to why Prototype has never been ported to 2.0, I’m all ears. Alternatively, if you can get an answer as to why, that would even more interesting. I can certainly imagine other reasons myself!
oh, I got no idea - I just didn’t think those theories sounded plausible. Anyway, I have no “inside info” on this 
fwiw, last time I remember having a business card I think I was “part of the magic”
Seriously,‘Stoc’,add “function”…
Decomposing a code with functions is the minimal habit now
Easier…more logic
‘Reference’ could also be very very nice
I’have used AUTO IT…Very nice dialect
Blitz3D…Nice…
The ‘reference manual’ of this 2 dialects are top notch
100% perfect syntax files.
RJtexted is a really good “IDE”?
And the Blitz3D portable compiler wrapper…Written in AutoIt…2 ways for STD_OUT
And the source
I don’t want to go on specifics forum,so maybe with random,files will be shared
@ StochasticTelegraph , Is there a way to save/memorize the variables? Or are you considering an “Export variables to TXT” feature in the context menu in version 2.2.99? 
Use case: let’s say I have a pretty CV pattern generated by BASICally and I’d like to use that one again. (See example below.) Ctrl-C doesn’t help so currently I send the CV to another module and record it there.
' this is the pattern creation
if in9>2 or start() then
for i=0 to 255
volt1[i]=random(0,10)
next
pos=-1
end if
' calculating the next step
pos=pos+1
' sending out the first eight of the voltages
out1=volt1[mod(pos,8)]
I have thought a bunch about “saving variables”, so it’s interesting to hear your confirm its utility.
Q: are you trying to save the pattern for use later in the playing of this patch, or do you want it to be available the next time you start the patch? In other words, does the data need to survive patch restarts?
Q: Is the data small (series of CV) or large (10 second audio sample)?
Q: once it’s saved somewhere, for some length of time, how do you want to refer to it? We typically refer to files by string names; I wouldn’t mind avoiding adding strings to the language, but are strings the obvious choice here? If you were, say, saving CV sequences for automatic playback later, then maybe string names aren’t helpful?
Thoughts?
Naming things is incredibly important for conveying what the thing is. Especially important when you set something aside for a while and come back later. So, I’d say “strings” (i.e. names) are important.
I remember when some implementations BASIC allowed only one or two-letter variable names, which made it much harder to understand a program.
My mother once inherited a Fortran program. It had a single variable, called “a”. “a” was an array, and each index was used for something different. nice!
In early versions of FORTRAN you had to represent every data structure imaginable as an array, because that’s all you had for structuring data. People got very creative, and many interesting efficient encoding techniques were invented to work within the limits of arrays.