@oid When you open xy, d you see escape characters?

@ingox I don't, I forgot that they fixed escaping in labels which were getting escapes for awhile. In my quick test used a send instead of garray to save on typing, I knew I was missing something. I am guessing back when you did this pd deleted multiple 160 in a row so you alternated between 32 and 160 to keep it from deleting them? Or perhaps pd did not actually print the 160 at all? Or perhaps the flaw of evolving logic during a long nights patching? So maybe 32 160 is best for backward compatibility? Which ever way, 32 160 should be as safe as plain old 160 and may provide increased backwards compatibility.

@oid Thanks for testing!

I used 32 and 160 to encode $0 into the array name so different abstractions can have arrays with individual names.