Ge;
And that's pretty much it. I am actually still not sure if I answered the right question - please let me know... Doh. If this part of the language seems confusing, we can certainly try to improve it.
Thanks for taking the time to clarify all that. It's not all that confusing anymore. It's dawning on me that ChucK as a language is quite a bit more elborate or at least generalised then our documentation and examples so far would lead one to believe. That's a Good Thing, much preferable to other instruments. This asigning of objects to array locations sounds like a very good idea to me, it should facilitate building little patch-bays and so on. I take it that if you write; // make new sinosc sinosc s; // assign it s @=> bank[0]; // connect bank[0] to dac bank[0] => dac; Then I would be free to do such things as; .3 => bank[0].gain; Right? That would be quite convenient. It wouldn't result in anything fundamentally new but for larger patches that need routing and mixing it would certainly make it all a lot easier and more readable to deal with. Thanks again, Kas.