> cause I'm expecting the object to behave as it should
more precisely, you're expecting the object to behave as YOU THINK it should ;-). But you're right that this discussion can go on forever. I just want to point out a last time that there's a difference between a bug and improper documentation. For example there's a technical reason why for computing audio in blocks, the reading onset for [vd~] would be less than the buffer size of [delwrite~] (especially when deliberately increasing the block size). This is totally logical and problems only arise because of vague terms like 'maximum delay time'. So it's not that the behaviour of [vd~] is wrong, but the helpfile - and that's an important difference!
Regarding the behaviour of overlapping subpatches you just have to accept how Pd works. Changing its behaviour will break hundreds of patches.
To repeat myself, I personally think most of what you declare as a 'bug' is just a matter of missing or misleading documentation.
Cheers
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 24. September 2015 um 18:54 Uhr
Von: "Alexandre Torres Porres" <por...@gmail.com>
An: "Christof Ressi" <christof.re...@gmx.at>
Cc: Pd-List <pd-list@lists.iem.at>
Betreff: Re: Re: [PD] more delay weirdness
Von: "Alexandre Torres Porres" <por...@gmail.com>
An: "Christof Ressi" <christof.re...@gmx.at>
Cc: Pd-List <pd-list@lists.iem.at>
Betreff: Re: Re: [PD] more delay weirdness
2015-09-24 9:53 GMT-03:00 Christof Ressi <christof.re...@gmx.at>:
If my last post felt like a repression, I deeply regret that!
no worries ;) just had to bring it up.
but you were calling other things a bug, that were no bugs in a technical sense (how ms are calculated in overlapping subpatches, how the maximum index for [vd~] is actual less than the buffer size, etc.).(...)I'm personally rather careful with calling something a bug because chances are high that there's simply a technical reason I didn't consider or couldn't understand.
Yeah, I see the way you think but I think quite differently and I still consider these things a "bug". I know there might be technical issues that explain why things happen. But when nothing tells me that when using an overlapped block that I have to adjust time and frequency for objects, I see that as a bug, cause I'm expecting the object to behave as it should, and it just doesn't, and then my patches don't work and it sucks. I have to ask the list why the heck something is not happening and why do I need workarounds... someone had to look deeply in the code and sort it out...
Well, and instead of building workarounds in the patch, I know there's a way to "fix" this in the object (just divide by the overlap number automatically in the code, seems easier than explaining it somewhere in the help file of a block~) - it wouldn't be impossible to fix it.
Well, and instead of building workarounds in the patch, I know there's a way to "fix" this in the object (just divide by the overlap number automatically in the code, seems easier than explaining it somewhere in the help file of a block~) - it wouldn't be impossible to fix it.
Regarding the maximum delay time. Well, help file says it can go up to the total length and it doesn't... so... bug detected. I'm sure there's a reason why it's happening, but I don't think its impossible to fix it and make it happen as well.
but anyway, I get your view, but I'll just disagree :) not sure if we should discuss and try to change each other's minds.
cheers
_______________________________________________ Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
