Re: [PD-dev] run-up to release 0.43
On Tue, 2010-08-31 at 22:04 +0200, András Murányi wrote: > On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 4:02 AM, Hans-Christoph Steiner > wrote: > > That's a bug in the command line flag parsing, you should file > a bug > report. IMHO, the whole flag parser should be rewritten using > on of the > standard opt/flag parsing libraries. getopt is in libc but is > more > limited, I am sure there is a GNU parser that handles -s short > and > --long options well. > > > http://sourceforge.net/projects/argopt/ (inactive project, wonder if > it's usable yet) > http://directory.fsf.org/project/popt/ (x11 licence) > i don't know is this is serious enough: http://wiki.tcl.tk/22050 Well, we'd want it to be something that is already widely deployed, like something in GNU libc or POSIX. popt looks pretty well used, at least on Debian/Ubuntu, but I think getopt() and getopt_long() are just about everywhere by default now. .hc ___ Pd-dev mailing list Pd-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
Re: [PD-dev] run-up to release 0.43
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 4:02 AM, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: > > That's a bug in the command line flag parsing, you should file a bug > report. IMHO, the whole flag parser should be rewritten using on of the > standard opt/flag parsing libraries. getopt is in libc but is more > limited, I am sure there is a GNU parser that handles -s short and > --long options well. > > http://sourceforge.net/projects/argopt/ (inactive project, wonder if it's usable yet) http://directory.fsf.org/project/popt/ (x11 licence) i don't know is this is serious enough: http://wiki.tcl.tk/22050 Andras ___ Pd-dev mailing list Pd-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
Re: [PD-dev] run-up to release 0.43
That's a bug in the command line flag parsing, you should file a bug
report. IMHO, the whole flag parser should be rewritten using on of the
standard opt/flag parsing libraries. getopt is in libc but is more
limited, I am sure there is a GNU parser that handles -s short and
--long options well.
.hc
On Thu, 2010-08-26 at 12:34 +0200, cyrille henry wrote:
> hello,
>
> i've got a new problem with this test version.
> yesterday, i add -font-face "andale mono" in pd startup preference.
> now, when i try to open this preference dialog, i have this error :
>
> (Tcl) UNHANDLED ERROR: extra characters after close-quote
> while executing
> "pdtk_startup_dialog .gfxstuba0f0fd0 0 "-listdev -mididev 1,2,3,4 -font-face
> "andale mono" -noautopatch -rt -alsa -alsaadd default -audiooutdev 3"
> "
> ("uplevel" body line 5)
> invoked from within
> "uplevel #0 $cmd_from_pd"
>
> cheers
> cyrille
>
>
>
> Le 19/08/2010 02:06, Miller Puckette a écrit :
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I have only 2 weeks left in the vicinity of my usual collection of testing
> > machines (will be in New York Sept 1 - Jan. 1!) and so should probably
> > try to get 0.43 finalized. I have several bugs to work on but I think the
> > whole thing is ready to put out compiled "test versions" for people to
> > exercise.
> >
> > I'll try not to add new "features" but just fix bugs for the next 2 weeks --
> > I'll have all fall for the next bunch of features (including, perhaps, the
> > ones I've been trying to find time to work on).
> >
> > I'll do my usual compiling and spot testing, hopefully putting out the
> > test versions within the next day.
> >
> > cheers
> > Miller
> >
> > ___
> > Pd-dev mailing list
> > Pd-dev@iem.at
> > http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
> >
>
___
Pd-dev mailing list
Pd-dev@iem.at
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
Re: [PD-dev] run-up to release 0.43
hello,
i've got a new problem with this test version.
yesterday, i add -font-face "andale mono" in pd startup preference.
now, when i try to open this preference dialog, i have this error :
(Tcl) UNHANDLED ERROR: extra characters after close-quote
while executing
"pdtk_startup_dialog .gfxstuba0f0fd0 0 "-listdev -mididev 1,2,3,4 -font-face "andale
mono" -noautopatch -rt -alsa -alsaadd default -audiooutdev 3"
"
("uplevel" body line 5)
invoked from within
"uplevel #0 $cmd_from_pd"
cheers
cyrille
Le 19/08/2010 02:06, Miller Puckette a écrit :
Hi all,
I have only 2 weeks left in the vicinity of my usual collection of testing
machines (will be in New York Sept 1 - Jan. 1!) and so should probably
try to get 0.43 finalized. I have several bugs to work on but I think the
whole thing is ready to put out compiled "test versions" for people to
exercise.
I'll try not to add new "features" but just fix bugs for the next 2 weeks --
I'll have all fall for the next bunch of features (including, perhaps, the
ones I've been trying to find time to work on).
I'll do my usual compiling and spot testing, hopefully putting out the
test versions within the next day.
cheers
Miller
___
Pd-dev mailing list
Pd-dev@iem.at
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
___
Pd-dev mailing list
Pd-dev@iem.at
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
Re: [PD-dev] run-up to release 0.43
--- On Fri, 8/20/10, Matt Barber wrote: > From: Matt Barber > Subject: Re: [PD-dev] run-up to release 0.43 > To: "Jonathan Wilkes" > Cc: pd-dev@iem.at > Date: Friday, August 20, 2010, 5:59 PM > > > > As for [initbang] - my only use has been for making > abstractions that > > can spawn a variable number of inlets/outlets. > That's the only way > > I've used it and the only way I've ever seen it used-- > if there are > > other uses maybe someone else on this list can give an > example. > > > > The [initbang] object gives abstractions > > the ability to do something that otherwise would only > be possible by > > coding an external in another programming language. > For example, > > with [initbang] I can quickly make an abstraction that > can act like > > Max/MSP's [trigger] object-- where you can specify > numeric values as > > arguments ( like [trigger b 0] ). > > > In other words, you want Pd to include "meta" capabilities > enough that > abstractions have all the functionality of coded > objects. [initbang] > would be one step in this direction, but there would be at > least these > other requirements: I'm interested in that, too, but the main reason I ask about [initbang] is because its patch has been sitting there on Sourceforge since 2006, and has been used in Pd-ext since then (and I haven't found any bugs so far with it) but not in Vanilla. If you do as the Sourceforge comments suggest and search the archives you'll not only find reasons for why the object is needed as I've suggested here, but also requests by developers (including yourself, I think) for the object to be included as an internal Pd object. To make a max-compatible [trigger] I don't need any of the other meta-features you mention (which are good ideas). I just need [initbang]. It only has one outlet, and I've never needed more than one in an abstraction. So if future-[loadbang]-with-args were implemented tomorrow I'd just need to change one object for my max-compatible [trigger] to work across all Pd versions. -Jonathan ___ Pd-dev mailing list Pd-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
Re: [PD-dev] run-up to release 0.43
On 08/21/2010 06:32 PM, IOhannes zmölnig wrote: > On 08/19/2010 02:06 AM, Miller Puckette wrote: >> >> I'll try not to add new "features" but just fix bugs for the next 2 weeks -- > > here is one bug and of course there are several simple bugfixes still pending in the tracker: e.g. 2806049: [bugfix] renamed arrays do not get used by dsp 2835752: floor, ceil functions in expr misdeclared those are really simple, about 2 lines code each. gmasdr IOhannes signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Pd-dev mailing list Pd-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
Re: [PD-dev] run-up to release 0.43
On 08/19/2010 02:06 AM, Miller Puckette wrote: > > I'll try not to add new "features" but just fix bugs for the next 2 weeks -- here is one bug (+ fix): "pd -version" prints garbage. https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=3050371&group_id=55736&atid=478072 mgfasdr IOhannes signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Pd-dev mailing list Pd-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
Re: [PD-dev] run-up to release 0.43
Hi, On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 05:06:44PM -0700, Miller Puckette wrote: > I'll try not to add new "features" but just fix bugs for the next 2 weeks There is one bugfix I wish to have for a long time: make [wrap~] output 0 when it receives [sig~ 0]. I don't think, anyone really relied on the wrong 1, that wrap~ currently produces, so this backwards incompatible change would be resonable IMO. My other wish is a feature: [tabpoke~]/[tabwriteat~]??? :) Ciao -- Frank ___ Pd-dev mailing list Pd-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
Re: [PD-dev] run-up to release 0.43
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 08/20/2010 05:59 PM, Matt Barber wrote: >> > 1) The ability, in vanilla, to dynamically delete individual > instantiated objects without "dynamic mousing." > this can already be done with externals: see iemguts. (i see that you say "vanilla"; however, we should differentiate between things that can be done in pd-vanilla, things that can be done with the help of externals, and things were we need to run a modified version of Pd; your request falls into category#2, which is not as evil as not being able to implement it at all without being miller) nevertheless, it would be very nice to have this feature built into Pd, thus i have submitted a patch to the sourceforge tracker a while ago. > 4) In some cases, access to name of the parent patch could be helpful. > this can be done with iemguts as well. your other 2 requests, however, would need a modified Pd-core. fgamsdr IOhanness -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkxurNwACgkQkX2Xpv6ydvQ0HACg+FxdFGbLbvJRhKZyMofYmsS4 tEQAoKEb69iPoIpLkRGPEIho/Sm+VPWv =ma+N -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Pd-dev mailing list Pd-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
Re: [PD-dev] run-up to release 0.43
> > As for [initbang] - my only use has been for making abstractions that > can spawn a variable number of inlets/outlets. That's the only way > I've used it and the only way I've ever seen it used-- if there are > other uses maybe someone else on this list can give an example. > > The [initbang] object gives abstractions > the ability to do something that otherwise would only be possible by > coding an external in another programming language. For example, > with [initbang] I can quickly make an abstraction that can act like > Max/MSP's [trigger] object-- where you can specify numeric values as > arguments ( like [trigger b 0] ). In other words, you want Pd to include "meta" capabilities enough that abstractions have all the functionality of coded objects. [initbang] would be one step in this direction, but there would be at least these other requirements: 1) The ability, in vanilla, to dynamically delete individual instantiated objects without "dynamic mousing." 2) Left [inlet~] that can take messages like [bang( or [stop( and pass them. 3) [inlet~] that can output a settable constant signal upon creation (imagine if you wanted to create [tabosc4~] as an abstraction using a [phasor~] and a [tabread4~] -- there isn't currently a good way to connect the [inlet~] to the phasor and also have a default frequency creation arg). 4) In some cases, access to name of the parent patch could be helpful. Matt ___ Pd-dev mailing list Pd-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
Re: [PD-dev] run-up to release 0.43
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 08/20/2010 08:30 AM, Jonathan Wilkes wrote: > > (And I think initbang >> and closebang are totally different animals...) > > They definitely are very different. > sure. i implemented both while i was at it :-) > As for [initbang] - my only use has been for making abstractions that > can spawn a variable number of inlets/outlets. That's the only way > I've used it and the only way I've ever seen it used-- if there are > other uses maybe someone else on this list can give an example. i hae used [initbang] a lot for dynamic patching (where [loadbang] is not triggered). e.g. i have used both [initbang] and [closebang] together in a system that implements click-free reinstantiation of objects: when you have several abstractions generating audio, and you edit and save one of them, all of the sister abs are recreated, which easily generates dropouts because of 2 reasons - - the dsp-chain has to be recalculated - - the phase of the a vanishing object is different from that of the newly created replacement. the dsp-chain recalculation can be made click-free by simply using faster processors (there are other ways (or rather: ways to reduce the time it takes for recalculation) as well, but i won't open this can of worms now) the phase however, is a real problem which cannot be easily solved (unless Pd does automatic fade in/out for created/deleted objects automatically, which is probably not such a good idea) the way i solved it, was sending the output of the abstraction to a summing bus (where [initbang] would create a fade in), and if the abstraction got deleted (detected by [closebang]!) it would fade out. this has proven to work well in live-coding performances on an eee901 (e.g. a not so super-fast processor), without a rather minimal change in the core of Pd (only [initbang] and [closebang] are required) mfgfst IOhannes -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkxuUSwACgkQkX2Xpv6ydvSEsACgv5Z7yUqGmRhvUDsu4De0JxCG 4BgAn2tl4l14b3YttP3BsKPPA70R5kph =DJ8M -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Pd-dev mailing list Pd-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
Re: [PD-dev] run-up to release 0.43
--- On Thu, 8/19/10, Miller Puckette wrote: > From: Miller Puckette > Subject: Re: [PD-dev] run-up to release 0.43 > To: "Jonathan Wilkes" > Cc: "Hans-Christoph Steiner" , pd-dev@iem.at > Date: Thursday, August 19, 2010, 10:44 PM > Hi Jonathan - > > I don't feel confortable with the design but don't > understand the rationale > for them well enough to know how to evaluate them. > (And I think initbang > and closebang are totally different animals...) They definitely are very different. As for [initbang] - my only use has been for making abstractions that can spawn a variable number of inlets/outlets. That's the only way I've used it and the only way I've ever seen it used-- if there are other uses maybe someone else on this list can give an example. The [initbang] object gives abstractions the ability to do something that otherwise would only be possible by coding an external in another programming language. For example, with [initbang] I can quickly make an abstraction that can act like Max/MSP's [trigger] object-- where you can specify numeric values as arguments ( like [trigger b 0] ). > > I want to redesign loadbang to take arguments, one of which > could indicate > at what "phase" of loading or closing the message should > come out -- but this > is a bigger design problem than I'm able to attack right > now. I worry, though, > that enshrining the proposed initbang/closebang will make > thiings uglier and > more complicated than necessary. The addition of initbang would be a rather restricted ugliness, since a) neither [loadbang] nor [initbang] have an inlet (and therefore must always be at the head of an object chain), and b) both have a single outlet that sends a single message, and that message is a bang in both cases. If future compatibility is the issue, and if the current [initbang] is to be a subset of the features of future [loadbang], wouldn't it be fairly straightforward to make [initbang] an alias of future [loadbang] (like a shortcut to whatever args you have to give future [loadbang] to get the functionality of current [initbang])? -Jonathan > > cheers > Miller > > > > Miller- would you mind commenting on the > initbang/closebang patch > > on Sourceforge, as to why it's still not included in > your Pd? > > > > Thanks, > > Jonathan > > > > > I'm > > > curious what features you have in mind, and > looking forward > > > to having > > > you in NYC. Perhaps we should have a mini PdCon > here > > > in the Fall :) > > > > > > .hc > > > > > > On Wed, 2010-08-18 at 17:06 -0700, Miller > Puckette wrote: > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > I have only 2 weeks left in the vicinity of > my usual > > > collection of testing > > > > machines (will be in New York Sept 1 - Jan. > 1!) and so > > > should probably > > > > try to get 0.43 finalized. I have several > bugs > > > to work on but I think the > > > > whole thing is ready to put out compiled > "test > > > versions" for people to > > > > exercise. > > > > > > > > I'll try not to add new "features" but just > fix bugs > > > for the next 2 weeks -- > > > > I'll have all fall for the next bunch of > features > > > (including, perhaps, the > > > > ones I've been trying to find time to work > on). > > > > > > > > I'll do my usual compiling and spot testing, > hopefully > > > putting out the > > > > test versions within the next day. > > > > > > > > cheers > > > > Miller > > > > > > > > > ___ > > > > Pd-dev mailing list > > > > Pd-dev@iem.at > > > > http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev > > > > > > > > > > > > ___ > > > Pd-dev mailing list > > > Pd-dev@iem.at > > > http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev > > > > > > > > > > > > > ___ > > Pd-dev mailing list > > Pd-dev@iem.at > > > http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev > ___ Pd-dev mailing list Pd-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
Re: [PD-dev] run-up to release 0.43
Hi Jonathan - I don't feel confortable with the design but don't understand the rationale for them well enough to know how to evaluate them. (And I think initbang and closebang are totally different animals...) I want to redesign loadbang to take arguments, one of which could indicate at what "phase" of loading or closing the message should come out -- but this is a bigger design problem than I'm able to attack right now. I worry, though, that enshrining the proposed initbang/closebang will make thiings uglier and more complicated than necessary. cheers Miller > > Miller- would you mind commenting on the initbang/closebang patch > on Sourceforge, as to why it's still not included in your Pd? > > Thanks, > Jonathan > > > I'm > > curious what features you have in mind, and looking forward > > to having > > you in NYC. Perhaps we should have a mini PdCon here > > in the Fall :) > > > > .hc > > > > On Wed, 2010-08-18 at 17:06 -0700, Miller Puckette wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > > > I have only 2 weeks left in the vicinity of my usual > > collection of testing > > > machines (will be in New York Sept 1 - Jan. 1!) and so > > should probably > > > try to get 0.43 finalized. I have several bugs > > to work on but I think the > > > whole thing is ready to put out compiled "test > > versions" for people to > > > exercise. > > > > > > I'll try not to add new "features" but just fix bugs > > for the next 2 weeks -- > > > I'll have all fall for the next bunch of features > > (including, perhaps, the > > > ones I've been trying to find time to work on). > > > > > > I'll do my usual compiling and spot testing, hopefully > > putting out the > > > test versions within the next day. > > > > > > cheers > > > Miller > > > > > > ___ > > > Pd-dev mailing list > > > Pd-dev@iem.at > > > http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev > > > > > > > > ___ > > Pd-dev mailing list > > Pd-dev@iem.at > > http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev > > > > > > > ___ > Pd-dev mailing list > Pd-dev@iem.at > http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev ___ Pd-dev mailing list Pd-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
Re: [PD-dev] run-up to release 0.43
--- On Thu, 8/19/10, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: > From: Hans-Christoph Steiner > Subject: Re: [PD-dev] run-up to release 0.43 > To: "Miller Puckette" > Cc: pd-dev@iem.at > Date: Thursday, August 19, 2010, 8:18 PM > > Sounds good to me, I should be able to spend a lot of time > working on > this in the next two weeks. I also set up nightly > builds on all the > machines from the pure-data.git. I can also get you > running on via > ssh/VNC/ on the PdLab test machines so you can test > wherever you have > internet :). > > Thanks for accepting all the patches, Pd-extended is going > to be reduced > to like 5 patches (initbang, font/colorization, string, > etc.). Miller- would you mind commenting on the initbang/closebang patch on Sourceforge, as to why it's still not included in your Pd? Thanks, Jonathan > I'm > curious what features you have in mind, and looking forward > to having > you in NYC. Perhaps we should have a mini PdCon here > in the Fall :) > > .hc > > On Wed, 2010-08-18 at 17:06 -0700, Miller Puckette wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > I have only 2 weeks left in the vicinity of my usual > collection of testing > > machines (will be in New York Sept 1 - Jan. 1!) and so > should probably > > try to get 0.43 finalized. I have several bugs > to work on but I think the > > whole thing is ready to put out compiled "test > versions" for people to > > exercise. > > > > I'll try not to add new "features" but just fix bugs > for the next 2 weeks -- > > I'll have all fall for the next bunch of features > (including, perhaps, the > > ones I've been trying to find time to work on). > > > > I'll do my usual compiling and spot testing, hopefully > putting out the > > test versions within the next day. > > > > cheers > > Miller > > > > ___ > > Pd-dev mailing list > > Pd-dev@iem.at > > http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev > > > > ___ > Pd-dev mailing list > Pd-dev@iem.at > http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev > ___ Pd-dev mailing list Pd-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
Re: [PD-dev] run-up to release 0.43
:) a toast! saúde abraço, glerm ___ Pd-dev mailing list Pd-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
Re: [PD-dev] run-up to release 0.43
Sounds good to me, I should be able to spend a lot of time working on this in the next two weeks. I also set up nightly builds on all the machines from the pure-data.git. I can also get you running on via ssh/VNC/ on the PdLab test machines so you can test wherever you have internet :). Thanks for accepting all the patches, Pd-extended is going to be reduced to like 5 patches (initbang, font/colorization, string, etc.). I'm curious what features you have in mind, and looking forward to having you in NYC. Perhaps we should have a mini PdCon here in the Fall :) .hc On Wed, 2010-08-18 at 17:06 -0700, Miller Puckette wrote: > Hi all, > > I have only 2 weeks left in the vicinity of my usual collection of testing > machines (will be in New York Sept 1 - Jan. 1!) and so should probably > try to get 0.43 finalized. I have several bugs to work on but I think the > whole thing is ready to put out compiled "test versions" for people to > exercise. > > I'll try not to add new "features" but just fix bugs for the next 2 weeks -- > I'll have all fall for the next bunch of features (including, perhaps, the > ones I've been trying to find time to work on). > > I'll do my usual compiling and spot testing, hopefully putting out the > test versions within the next day. > > cheers > Miller > > ___ > Pd-dev mailing list > Pd-dev@iem.at > http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev ___ Pd-dev mailing list Pd-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
[PD-dev] run-up to release 0.43
Hi all, I have only 2 weeks left in the vicinity of my usual collection of testing machines (will be in New York Sept 1 - Jan. 1!) and so should probably try to get 0.43 finalized. I have several bugs to work on but I think the whole thing is ready to put out compiled "test versions" for people to exercise. I'll try not to add new "features" but just fix bugs for the next 2 weeks -- I'll have all fall for the next bunch of features (including, perhaps, the ones I've been trying to find time to work on). I'll do my usual compiling and spot testing, hopefully putting out the test versions within the next day. cheers Miller ___ Pd-dev mailing list Pd-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
