On Tue, Aug 31, 2004 at 02:46:13PM -0400, Dave Robillard wrote:
> I was wondering about this the other day - is there no OSC 'standard'
> for how to declare note-ons, offs, etc?
>
> If OSC really is to become a MIDI replacement, there's needs to be an
> explicitly defined standard that says "this
On Tue, 2004-08-31 at 14:44, Robert Jonsson wrote:
> > Getting off topic here, but there's a little more to it than that. 1
> > Syntactic sugared implementation is much much more preferable to 101
> > conventions for doing OOP with void pointers.
> > Things like typesafety, getting rid of macros in
On Tue, 2004-08-31 at 09:28, Steve Harris wrote:
> The obvious problem you're likly to hit is that you still need to speak
> alsa-sequencer or something in order to get events from controllers. You
> can go pure-OSC by accepting OSC 'm' types or occam format OSC messages
> and writing a simple, ext
> Getting off topic here, but there's a little more to it than that. 1
> Syntactic sugared implementation is much much more preferable to 101
> conventions for doing OOP with void pointers.
> Things like typesafety, getting rid of macros in favour of inline
> functions. The STL is another real rea
On Tue, 31 Aug 2004 13:15:24 -0400, Pete Bessman wrote
> At Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:02:43 +0100,
> Steve Harris wrote:
> >
> > I like the OO-in-C style of programming, its pretty much the best of both
> > worlds IMHO. C syntax, but no C++ 'features'.
>
> Seriously. You can easily do Real OOP in C; t
At Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:02:43 +0100,
Steve Harris wrote:
>
> I like the OO-in-C style of programming, its pretty much the best of both
> worlds IMHO. C syntax, but no C++ 'features'.
Seriously. You can easily do Real OOP in C; the only thing it lacks
is syntactic sugar. I wish there was a real C
On Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:02:43 +0100, Steve Harris wrote
> On Tue, Aug 31, 2004 at 02:48:46PM +0100, Dave Griffiths wrote:
> > > BTW, if you have reasonable OSC covereage I'd be very interested in
> > > compatibility tests between whatever you're using and liblo.
> >
> > Very early days, I've only i
On Tue, Aug 31, 2004 at 02:48:46PM +0100, Dave Griffiths wrote:
> > BTW, if you have reasonable OSC covereage I'd be very interested in
> > compatibility tests between whatever you're using and liblo.
>
> Very early days, I've only implemented simple messages so far - but I'm using
> liblo for my
On Tue, 31 Aug 2004 14:28:50 +0100, Steve Harris wrote
> On Tue, Aug 31, 2004 at 11:43:16AM +0100, Dave Griffiths wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Ok, so I'm playing with osc (currently doing gui->app communication with it)
> > but all my individual apps still talk midi between them. This is quite
> > c
On Tue, Aug 31, 2004 at 09:33:44PM +1000, Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:
> > yields me both an error. is that supposed to return true?
>
> For sf_format_check() to return TRUE, you MUST also set the sample
> rate, channel count and number of channels.
i see. thank you. missed that in the test case.
On Tue, Aug 31, 2004 at 11:43:16AM +0100, Dave Griffiths wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Ok, so I'm playing with osc (currently doing gui->app communication with it)
> but all my individual apps still talk midi between them. This is quite
> cumbersome, as I want to start having lots of controls that midi doe
Greetings:
While doing some research on VST/VSTi technology I checked the
Wikipedia page for "VST". It's a good informative page, and there's even
an entry regarding the fst/libfst project. However, there was no mention
of Kjetil's vstserver and its clients. There is now.
It occurred to me th
On Mon, 30 Aug 2004 22:30:41 -0600
martin rumori <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> but, with 1.0.10 and 1.0.11pre4,
>
> SF_INFO info;
>
> info.format = SF_FORMAT_AIFF | SF_FORMAT_PCM_16 | SF_ENDIAN_LITTLE;
> if (! sf_format_check(&info))
> {
> printf("AIFF | LITTLE invalid\n");
>
Hi all,
Ok, so I'm playing with osc (currently doing gui->app communication with it)
but all my individual apps still talk midi between them. This is quite
cumbersome, as I want to start having lots of controls that midi doesn't
support - and I don't really "think" in midi these days anyway.
Is t
On Tue, Aug 31, 2004 at 07:54:58AM +1000, Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:
> SF_ENDIAN_CPU really only makes sense when the file format allows
> bot endian-nesses.
ahh, i see, the SF_ENDIAN_* format parameters are meant to FORCE to a
specific endian-ness, and with formats supporting just one endian-ness
15 matches
Mail list logo
