Hello all,
On Sun, 12 Dec 2004, Kai Vehmanen wrote:
> Ok, I've been now testing a new, semi-realtime, mechanism to archive the
> lists. What's important is that this is something I can support also in
> the future, so the archiving can continue for all three lists.
[...]
> What I'm missing now is
Hi Tim,
> I've worked on something that has many parts of what you are looking
> for, but it won't run if compiled with g++ 3.0 or later. The project
> is discontinued, but the sources are here: quitte.de/nam.html if you
> happen to feel adventurous.
I remember that I looked at nam a while ago, b
> Stefan Turner
> Rui,
>
> Thanks for your reply. I am trying to build Jack first
> just to see if it'll work with the CCRMA Alsa I've
> already got. So far I've done:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> jack-audio-connection-kit-0.99.35.3usx2y]# aclocal
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> jack-audio-connection-kit-0.99.35
Hallo,
Andreas Kuckartz hat gesagt: // Andreas Kuckartz wrote:
> Paul Davis wrote:
>
> > its not that clear. according to the timeline provided at Ircam,
> > "Patcher", the predecessor of Max, was started in 1986. i don't know
> > if patcher had a visual dataflow model or not. Max itself didn't e
Paul Davis wrote:
> its not that clear. according to the timeline provided at Ircam,
> "Patcher", the predecessor of Max, was started in 1986. i don't know
> if patcher had a visual dataflow model or not. Max itself didn't exist
> till 1990.
Miller Puckette (the creator of Patcher and PD) probabl
On Wed, Dec 15, 2004 at 05:53:30PM +, Stefan Turner wrote:
> I can't find anything about this file, not even in
> configure.ac, and I really don't have a clue about
> this kind of thing (sorry if it's something really
> obvious). It certainly seems to stop the rest of the
> build working thoug
Rui,
Thanks for your reply. I am trying to build Jack first
just to see if it'll work with the CCRMA Alsa I've
already got. So far I've done:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
jack-audio-connection-kit-0.99.35.3usx2y]# aclocal
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
jack-audio-connection-kit-0.99.35.3usx2y]# autoheader
[EMAIL PROTECT
On Wed, Dec 15, 2004 at 02:30:09PM +0200, Juhana Sadeharju wrote:
> When Csound type software was first written? 1960? 70?
I assume you mean the "Music N" family of languages.
Music IV dates to at least 1961 according to this page:
http://music.dartmouth.edu/~wowem/electronmedia/music/eamhistory.h
On ons, 2004-12-15 at 10:39 -0500, Fred Gleason wrote:
> Not a patent on touchscreens, but on touchscreens, when used a certain way,
> by
> a certain industry, for a certain specific purpose. DRECK! Mares' nests,
> one and all. Not that that stops any attorney -- straining at gnats and
> sw
>From: Xavier Amatriain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>> I read that National Circuits sued and won a case against Mathworks for
>> their Simulink product infringing a number of paterns (September this
>> year).
The first patent should expire soon as their software Labview
was launched 1986. It contains s
On Wednesday 15 December 2004 05:27, Jens M Andreasen wrote:
> Actually, the patent is not on graph-traversal as such, but on graph-
> traversal in context with virtual instrumentation having some kind of
> adjustable front-panel on screen ... It is a "methods" patent that only
> applies when all
>Well, this patent is dated 1986. I'm pretty sure Max existed in some
>form or another before then, right?
its not that clear. according to the timeline provided at Ircam,
"Patcher", the predecessor of Max, was started in 1986. i don't know
if patcher had a visual dataflow model or not. Max itsel
On Wed, 2004-15-12 at 11:27 +0100, Jens M Andreasen wrote:
> On ons, 2004-12-15 at 00:11 -0500, Dave Robillard wrote:
>
> > Om, a modular synth I'm working on, absolutely "infringes" on that
> > patent as well. The code that would be considered infringing is an
> > elementary graph-traversal, ver
The reason I forwarded the e-mail is that, as opposed to what has been
said in the list, it turns out that stupid patents can be used to win
(also stupid) court trials. Scary!
On dc, 2004-12-15 at 12:03, Pau Arumi wrote:
> > Actually, the patent is not on graph-traversal as such, but on graph-
>
On Wed, 2004-15-12 at 17:16 +1100, Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Dec 2004 00:11:41 -0500
> Dave Robillard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > There's absolutely no way that someone can't find prior art for this.
> > It's completely frivolous.
>
> Exactly. So why are you getting your knicke
> Actually, the patent is not on graph-traversal as such, but on graph-
> traversal in context with virtual instrumentation having some kind of
> adjustable front-panel on screen ... It is a "methods" patent that only
> applies when all the ingredients are in place. The prior art shown in
> court
On ons, 2004-12-15 at 00:11 -0500, Dave Robillard wrote:
> Om, a modular synth I'm working on, absolutely "infringes" on that
> patent as well. The code that would be considered infringing is an
> elementary graph-traversal, very similar to a DFS (depth-first search)
> algorithm you'd learn in an
17 matches
Mail list logo
