2016-05-07 14:53 GMT-03:00 Miller Puckette <m...@ucsd.edu>: > I put in a sentence to scare users away from "%". Use "mod" instead :) >
oh, but I can't see it, so you just did it now, right? I know they differ for negative values input, never knew why the reason.. expr also has a "%" function that behaves in the same way as the [%] object, to make things more confusing, a "fmod" function in expr also behaves in the same was as "%", but for float arguments, and not like vanilla's [mod] in max, [%~] (or [modulo~]) will behave the same way as "fmod" in expr, that is modulo for float arguments, which is also in agreement to pd vanilla's % - only that pd's is for ints. With all that, what I mean to ask and say is that I can't see what's wrong with [%] - the odd one out seems to be [mod]. what do you say? cheers
_______________________________________________ Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
