Re: [chuck-users] Flush ChucK IO

Tom;

Thanks, if this works that’s fine with me a ftos or .toString() would be even better of course ;)

Well, all objects have .toString(), but in ChucK primitives aren't objects

so they lack member-functions. I think a cast should be added because plus-chucking a float to a string already forms a implicit cast so a explicit one should be fine as well, I feel. That would be coherent with ChucK being meant to be very readable; a explicit cast may well be a part of the coder trying to express his intentions clearly. Remarkably the Std does supply a tool to go from a string to a number, but not the other way around. I say we overload "$" as the most simple and coherent solution. Kas.