Re: [Faudiostream-users] Incorrect argument order with recursive composition and named parameters

2016-05-29 Thread Yann Orlarey
> EDIT: I rebuilt Faust from Git. *I’m pleasantly surprised that someone > has fixed bugs related to split composition or argument passing.* Probably some "Merry Prankster". They are very well known for introducing and fixing bugs at night ;-) Yann Orlarey Directeur scientifique www.grame.fr

Re: [Faudiostream-users] Incorrect argument order with recursive composition and named parameters

2016-05-29 Thread jimbo1qaz
(I’m testing out Markdown Here extension on Firefox, to write emails in Markdown. I type Markdown in a text editor, paste it into Gmail, and it renders. But Gmail edits are not translated back into Markdown. The formatting seems different, does it look good?) Your workaround works for calling fir_

Re: [Faudiostream-users] Incorrect argument order with recursive composition and named parameters

2016-05-28 Thread Julius Smith
I would like to add that Faust is perhaps the least "buggy" software I have used in my life, despite the fact that I am regularly using the latest git pull. I don't think you will find more generally solid software anywhere on the planet. - Julius On Sat, May 28, 2016 at 12:30 PM, Yann Orlarey

Re: [Faudiostream-users] Incorrect argument order with recursive composition and named parameters

2016-05-28 Thread Yann Orlarey
As I already told you in my previous answer it is NOT a bug, but simply a misconception that you have on how the language works. Newbie questions are always very welcome in this mailing list and there are no stupid questions. It is perfectly legitimate to have misconceptions and/or to make errors

Re: [Faudiostream-users] Incorrect argument order with recursive composition and named parameters

2016-05-28 Thread Julius Smith
It looks like you want fir_delay(i, val) = _ <: fdelay(32, i, val); as opposed to fir_delay(i, val) = fdelay(32, i, val); - Julius On Sat, May 28, 2016 at 10:53 AM, jimbo1qaz wrote: > I think we're talking about different bugs. > > I started a new thread for my latest bug: > https://sourcefor

Re: [Faudiostream-users] Incorrect argument order with recursive composition and named parameters

2016-05-28 Thread jimbo1qaz
I think we're talking about different bugs. I started a new thread for my latest bug: https://sourceforge.net/p/faudiostream/mailman/message/35121517/ -- What NetFlow Analyzer can do for you? Monitors network bandwidth and

Re: [Faudiostream-users] Incorrect argument order with recursive composition and named parameters

2016-05-28 Thread Yann Orlarey
Hi Jimbo, No buggy behavior here, but simply a misunderstanding of Faust's signal processing semantics, and how the language works in particular abstractions, applications and _, What do you expect by passing _ (the identity function) as argument of another function ? Here is what happens on a s

Re: [Faudiostream-users] Incorrect argument order with recursive composition and named parameters

2016-05-27 Thread jimbo1qaz
I first noticed buggy behavior in my original program on FaustLive-ubuntu-x86_64-2.43. I confirmed the incorrect routing using faust from Git, compiled a few weeks ago. To confirm the bug, ran the command "faust -svg file.dsp" to generate a flowchart. - The first two are routed correctly: fir

Re: [Faudiostream-users] Incorrect argument order with recursive composition and named parameters

2016-05-27 Thread Mykle Hansen
All three of those examples compile and open for me, and behave similarly, using FaustLive on Mac OS. What platform are you on, and what’s your compile path? -mykle- > On May 26, 2016, at 11:20 PM, jimbo1qaz wrote: > > Does anyone have any insights into this type of buggy behavior? > > Maybe

Re: [Faudiostream-users] Incorrect argument order with recursive composition and named parameters

2016-05-26 Thread jimbo1qaz
Does anyone have any insights into this type of buggy behavior? Maybe I should look into the source code and write a bugfix myself? How easy is it for random users to make Git contributions on Sourceforge? Do you use pull requests, etc? Do you have a fixed list of contributors? Manage patches by

Re: [Faudiostream-users] Incorrect argument order with recursive composition and named parameters

2016-05-22 Thread jimbo1qaz
fdelay(32, i, val); process = _ <: par(i, 2, fir_delay(3-i, _) ); On Sun, May 22, 2016 at 3:08 AM, jimbo1qaz wrote: > > -- Forwarded message -- > From: jimbo1qaz > Date: Sat, May 21, 2016 at 4:54 PM > Subject: Re: [Faudiostream-users] Incorrect argument or

Re: [Faudiostream-users] Incorrect argument order with recursive composition and named parameters

2016-05-21 Thread Bart Brouns
On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 10:25:54PM -0700, jimbo1qaz wrote: >Another bug related to handling named parameters: > >func(x) = x^2 + x + 1; >process = func(_); // I didn't test "process=func" I suggest you test that! ;) or: process(y) = func(y); I used y here, but I could just as well have called i

Re: [Faudiostream-users] Incorrect argument order with recursive composition and named parameters

2016-05-21 Thread Bart Brouns
Hi Jimbo, Looks as expected to me. Did you use: process(x) = snes_delay(x,0.3); Cheers, Bart. On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 08:57:59PM -0700, jimbo1qaz wrote: >I'm just starting out in Faust, and I believe I have discovered a bug. > >I was trying to write a feedback echo function with configurable st

Re: [Faudiostream-users] Incorrect argument order with recursive composition and named parameters

2016-05-20 Thread jimbo1qaz
Another bug related to handling named parameters: func(x) = x^2 + x + 1; process = func(_); // I didn't test "process=func" When I compile this program, "process" has two inputs, not one. If I try to call "func" in stereo, I end up with four inputs. On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 8:57 PM, jimbo1qaz wr

[Faudiostream-users] Incorrect argument order with recursive composition and named parameters

2016-05-20 Thread jimbo1qaz
I'm just starting out in Faust, and I believe I have discovered a bug. I was trying to write a feedback echo function with configurable strength. Here's the code: snes_delay(x, feedback) = ( (x + volf(feedback*_)) ~ delay(131072, SR/10 - 1, _) ) @ 1; Unexpectedly, this function produced an i