Re: Is beep zero-based?
At 10:51 AM -0700 6/8/03, Stephen Quinn Barncard wrote: Isn't there something like wait until the sound is done in Transcript? There is, but it only applies to audioclips, not to beep sounds. -- Jeanne A. E. DeVoto ~ [EMAIL PROTECTED] Runtime Revolution Limited - Software at the Speed of Thought http://www.runrev.com/ ___ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: Is beep zero-based?
Hi Dan, The transcript dictionary explains it like this: Cross-platform note: Windows and OS X do not execute the beep command if it¹s issued while a beep is playing. This means that if you specify a numberOfTimes on a Windows or OS X system, the user might hear fewer beeps because not all of them are sent to the speaker. To ensure that the user hears a specific number of beeps, use a loop with a wait command after each beep: repeat for 4 times -- ensure 4 separate beeps beep wait 200 milliseconds end repeat On 8/6/03 10:38 AM, Dan Shafer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I know I'm getting old and my hearing is probably faulty but on OS X at least, it seems that beep 2 always produces one beep, beep 3 always produces 2, etc. A beep by itself also produces one beep. Am I going nuts or is this either a bug or at least a departure from what one would expect? ___ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: Is beep zero-based?
On Sunday, June 8, 2003, at 12:30 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The transcript dictionary explains it like this: Cross-platform note: Windows and OS X do not execute the beep command if its issued while a beep is playing. This means that if you specify a numberOfTimes on a Windows or OS X system, the user might hear fewer beeps because not all of them are sent to the speaker. To ensure that the user hears a specific number of beeps, use a loop with a wait command after each beep: repeat for 4 times -- ensure 4 separate beeps beep wait 200 milliseconds end repeat Translation: This bug is at such a low priority, it is not scheduled to be fixed, so the burden falls to the documentation writer to cheerfully rationalize it away. The programmer's time is valuable, and the tech writer's time is, too. But, it is clear to the whole world that the programer's time is more so. The user's time is not even considered. Dar Scott awful poet ___ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: Is beep zero-based?
On Sunday, June 8, 2003, at 12:30 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Cross-platform note: Windows and OS X do not execute the beep command if its issued while a beep is playing. This means that if you specify a numberOfTimes on a Windows or OS X system, the user might hear fewer beeps because not all of them are sent to the speaker. To ensure that the user hears a specific number of beeps, use a loop with a wait command after each beep: repeat for 4 times -- ensure 4 separate beeps beep wait 200 milliseconds end repeat On my OS X I can execute a beep while a beep is playing, but not during the first 10 to 20 ms of the beep. The beeps are not queued, so it stutters if the time is too short. And... on mouseUp put the long seconds into tDummy put the long seconds into tStart put the long seconds into tEnd put (tEnd-tStart) into tCorrection put empty into field Report repeat with beepTimes = 0 to 4 put the long seconds into tStart beep beepTimes put the long seconds into tEnd set the numberFormat to 0.## put beepTimes beeps into beepReport set the numberFormat to 0.00 put ((tEnd-tStart)-tCorrection) s into timeReport put max( (beepTimes-1)*.5 +.0005, .0001) s expected into expReport put beepReport timeReport expReport lineFeed after field Report wait 2 seconds end repeat end mouseUp This produces ... 0 beeps0.09 s0.000100 s expected 1 beeps0.000221 s0.000500 s expected 2 beeps0.000279 s0.500500 s expected 3 beeps0.500557 s1.000500 s expected 4 beeps1.000787 s1.500500 s expected Bug. Dar Scott ___ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: Is beep zero-based?
On Sunday, June 8, 2003, at 12:30 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: repeat for 4 times -- ensure 4 separate beeps beep wait 200 milliseconds end repeat on mouseUp newBeep field Times end mouseUp on newBeep pTimes -- beeps pTimes times; fast, will overlap if pTimes 0.5 then beep send newBeep pTimes-1 to me in .5 seconds end if end newBeep Dar Scott ___ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: Is beep zero-based?
On Sunday, June 8, 2003, at 11:20 AM, Scott Raney wrote: Bottom line: if you really need to do multiple beeps (not a nice thing to do to your users anyway IMHO), you probably should be making your own alert sound and play that instead of using the system beep. Agreed. Multiple beeps might best be left as a debugging aid and then when one might be across the room. Dar Scott ___ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: is beep zero-based?
Thanks to valetia for the pointer to the docs (doh!) and to Dar Scott for an admittedly awful but nonetheless delightful poetic augmentation. I should definitely have read the beep doc before I posted. For that, I apologize for wasting the list's bandwidth. OTOH, I'm not entirely sure even this documentor-sweep-this-under-the-rug explanation is really accurate. If it were, I would expect the number of audible beeps to be either unpredictable and almost random or I'd expect there to be some relationship between the number of beeps ordered and the number of beeps actually heard. But in my experience on OS X, at least, the number of beeps heard is always and consistently one fewer than ordered by the script. The doc explanation for this seems to me to fall short of a legitimate explanation of the problem and inclines me to agree with Dar: it's a bug but it's not going to be fixed any time soon, so program around it. And that's how I'll document it in my eBook! -.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.- .-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.- Dan Shafer Technology Visionary - Technology Assessment - Documentation Looking at technology from every angle http://www.eclecticity.com Latest Book Release: HTML Utopia: Designing Without Tables Using CSS (http://www.sitepoint.com/books/css1/) Watch for my new eBook/Web site/Rev Stack Set, Revolution Pros this summer ___ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: Is beep zero-based?
Isn't there something like wait until the sound is done in Transcript? On Sunday, June 8, 2003, at 12:30 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Cross-platform note: Windows and OS X do not execute the beep command if it's issued while a beep is playing. This means that if you specify a numberOfTimes on a Windows or OS X system, the user might hear fewer beeps because not all of them are sent to the speaker. To ensure that the user ___ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: Is beep zero-based?
On Sunday, June 8, 2003, at 10:54 AM, Dar Scott wrote: Bug. That sound obnoxious. What I really mean is based on the model of how this might be done in my imagination, this sure looks like a bug. More importantly... I think this indicates that the counting error and the re-beep considerations are distinct. I think the counting error is a real bug and might even have gotten in the way of mitigating problems with re-beep. Even what should be the right re-beep behavior is probably debatable. Dar Scott ___ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: is beep zero-based?
On Sunday, June 8, 2003, at 11:37 AM, Dan Shafer wrote: OTOH, I'm not entirely sure even this documentor-sweep-this-under-the-rug explanation is really accurate. If it were, I would expect the number of audible beeps to be either unpredictable and almost random or I'd expect there to be some relationship between the number of beeps ordered and the number of beeps actually heard. But in my experience on OS X, at least, the number of beeps heard is always and consistently one fewer than ordered by the script. That is what I see on OS X, too. The doc explanation for this seems to me to fall short of a legitimate explanation of the problem and inclines me to agree with Dar: it's a bug but it's not going to be fixed any time soon, so program around it. However, since it might be clearer after our discussion that it is distinct from the re-beep explanation, it might take on a live as a distinct problem and thus take on priorities separate from the re-beep issues. Dar ___ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Is beep zero-based?
I know I'm getting old and my hearing is probably faulty but on OS X at least, it seems that beep 2 always produces one beep, beep 3 always produces 2, etc. A beep by itself also produces one beep. Am I going nuts or is this either a bug or at least a departure from what one would expect? -.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.- .-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.- Dan Shafer Technology Visionary - Technology Assessment - Documentation Looking at technology from every angle http://www.eclecticity.com Latest Book Release: HTML Utopia: Designing Without Tables Using CSS (http://www.sitepoint.com/books/css1/) Watch for my new eBook/Web site/Rev Stack Set, Revolution Pros this summer ___ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: Is beep zero-based?
On 6/7/03 7:38 PM, Dan Shafer wrote: I know I'm getting old and my hearing is probably faulty but on OS X at least, it seems that beep 2 always produces one beep, beep 3 always produces 2, etc. A beep by itself also produces one beep. Am I going nuts or is this either a bug or at least a departure from what one would expect? It's not what I would expect. Looks like a bug in the engine. -- Jacqueline Landman Gay | [EMAIL PROTECTED] HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com ___ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
