so is it correct to state that the workaround setting block~ size down to 1 for sample correct works is not existant for
> most (maybe all, not sure) signal-to-message objects besause they > have a minimum hard limit of 64 samples. ? [?] 2010/12/24 Roman Haefeli <reduz...@gmail.com> > On Thu, 2010-12-23 at 16:04 -0500, Mike Moser-Booth wrote: > > > > On 12/23/10 8:51 AM, Roman Haefeli wrote: > > > On Thu, 2010-12-23 at 08:10 -0500, Mike Moser-Booth wrote: > > >> [bang~], [edge~], and [threshold~] I've noticed for sure are like > this. > > >> I don't know about [vline~] since I use it to avoid having to change > the > > >> block size. :-) > > > I happily repeat myself: > > > There is no need to adjust the block size when using [vline~]. > > > > Yeah, that's what I was trying to say. > > Sorry for not reading your post carefully. That's indeed what you said. > > Roman > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Pd-list@iem.at mailing list > UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> > http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list >
<<35F.gif>>
_______________________________________________ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list