-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 > From: Leandro da Mota Damasceno <lem...@gmail.com> > > Let's think in a different way... Why would I just use a udpreceive and > a route in Max/MSP to make it work and why doesn't it work with PD? What > does > the udpreceive does differently for the output in Max/MSP? I am guessing > it was an internal unpackOSC that does not care about /. Is that it? >
i think, that max's [udp*] objects simply allows to use messages that are not OSC, whereas the Pd objects enforce a strict OSC-adherence. usually, the way to implement communication standards is: - - be strict in what you send (here the max-objects are faulty) - - be lax in what you accept (here the pd-objects are faulty) the simplest way to fix the problem is: adhere to the standard! so if you can change the max-patch, i would advise you to simply add a leading "/" to the messages you send. fgmsdft IOhannes -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkzBxFkACgkQkX2Xpv6ydvS9xgCgrQZppWIAHu60uDEIqQ3MJCUh GrMAn0Wjhr77zAusMq9vVOu8QLX/dP2R =w3Q7 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
