Yes, why not just send a list though?
It seems that in WinXP [midiout] sends 247(start sysex) followed by
240(end sysex), the intervening message doesn't get transmitted. Also if
the message contains numbers > 127 then more bytes get transmitted, not
good.
Also as lists seem to be easier to generate than comma separated
messages, and a list already has its buffer allocated, there is no need
to reserve 1000 or so bytes just in case. Maybe someone should add a
list method to [midiout]?
Maybe rename it to [sysexout] and skip the need to put 247 and 240 in
every message...
Martin
cyrille henry wrote:
martin.pe...@sympatico.ca a écrit :
On linux with alsa midi, sysex output works this way:
bang
|
[t b b b b]
| | | | [247( [123( [88( [240(
|_____|_____|____|
| |
[midiout]
this is the same than :
[240, 88, 123, 247(
(with coma)
c
That is, banging all the values separately into [midiout] during one
message time slot.
(Note the message is written backwards since the first byte to
transmit is the sysex status byte, 240)
Banging them in one at a time manually only sends one byte, banging
them in as a list stops [midiout] from working until you reopen the
patch.
Martin
_______________________________________________
Pd-dev mailing list
pd-...@iem.at
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
_______________________________________________
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
