> The [change -1] is a great idea, I just committed that to bytemask.pd
> and debytemask.pd. But the [pd resolve-bits_0-7] abstractions seem
> quite labor-intensive, but they work. I think it would work better to
> use multiple instances of [debytemask].
>
> .hc
Not sure what you mean by "labor
It seems that the website is back up, anyone here anything about what
happened?
http://puredata.info/
.hc
___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Le 2011-09-15 à 15:45:00, Hans-Christoph Steiner a écrit :
On Wed, 2011-08-24 at 13:28 -0400, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
On Tue, 23 Aug 2011, Stephen Lavelle wrote:
4 - is there a shortcut for deleting connections? something like ctrl+click
would save me a lot of time.
BTW, if you select a set
On Wed, 2011-08-24 at 13:28 -0400, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Aug 2011, Stephen Lavelle wrote:
>
> > 4 - is there a shortcut for deleting connections? something like
> > ctrl+click would save me a lot of time.
>
> BTW, if you select a set of objects, then cut it, then paste it, copies
This looks very thorough and useful. It would be great to have in the
http://puredata.info/docs section (once the website is back up).
.hc
On Mon, 2011-08-29 at 16:16 +0200, abel.jer...@free.fr wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> My last mail was broken by the mailing list engine.
>
> The "prose" in a file
On Thu, 2011-09-15 at 13:19 -0400, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-09-15 at 18:43 +0200, Roman Haefeli wrote:
> > On Thu, 2011-09-15 at 11:36 -0400, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2011-09-15 at 10:01 +0200, Roman Haefeli wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 2011-09-15 at 09:44 +0200, In
On Thu, 2011-09-15 at 13:29 -0400, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-09-15 at 18:54 +0200, Ingo wrote:
> > Hi Hans,
> >
> > unfortunately I am not really good at C or C++ so I have to stick with
> > simplifying within Pd until I get there. But I am actually working on it so
> > I'll be
On Thu, 2011-09-15 at 18:54 +0200, Ingo wrote:
> Hi Hans,
>
> unfortunately I am not really good at C or C++ so I have to stick with
> simplifying within Pd until I get there. But I am actually working on it so
> I'll be able to replace certain objects in my patches by more efficient
> externals.
On Thu, 2011-09-15 at 18:43 +0200, Roman Haefeli wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-09-15 at 11:36 -0400, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
> > On Thu, 2011-09-15 at 10:01 +0200, Roman Haefeli wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2011-09-15 at 09:44 +0200, Ingo wrote:
> > > > The reason why I didn't make an abstraction for the "de
Hi Hans,
unfortunately I am not really good at C or C++ so I have to stick with
simplifying within Pd until I get there. But I am actually working on it so
I'll be able to replace certain objects in my patches by more efficient
externals. Anyway, I think in the case of simplifying the pduino patch
On Thu, 2011-09-15 at 11:36 -0400, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-09-15 at 10:01 +0200, Roman Haefeli wrote:
> > On Thu, 2011-09-15 at 09:44 +0200, Ingo wrote:
> > > The reason why I didn't make an abstraction for the "debyte" is that I
> > > wanted to keep the number of files and dep
On Thu, 2011-09-15 at 10:20 +0200, Ingo wrote:
> > Interesting. How did you quantify the amount of message transfers? What
> > makes it differ so much, like you say?
>
> I simply (roughly) counted the numbers of objects the calculation including
> all sub processes have to pass until you get the f
On Thu, 2011-09-15 at 10:01 +0200, Roman Haefeli wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-09-15 at 09:44 +0200, Ingo wrote:
> > The reason why I didn't make an abstraction for the "debyte" is that I
> > wanted to keep the number of files and dependencies as low as possible. I
> > think this was the original idea of t
I just tried to open the help file on Windows XP and Natty and it crashes Pd
on both platforms.
Ingo
> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> Von: pd-list-boun...@iem.at [mailto:pd-list-boun...@iem.at] Im Auftrag von
> olsen
> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 15. September 2011 14:52
> An: tim vets
> Cc: pd-li
Hi
if you're running on Linux check the [ADDITIONAL-INFOS] in the arduino-help.pd on the upper right corner in the
pd-rewrite: https://github.com/reduzent/pduino
as mentioned below the infos you'll find there are basically from
http://answers.ros.org/answers/101/revisions/
with this method you
> Interesting. How did you quantify the amount of message transfers? What
> makes it differ so much, like you say?
I simply (roughly) counted the numbers of objects the calculation including
all sub processes have to pass until you get the final result.
(Unfortunately I cannot tell how heavy each
On Thu, 2011-09-15 at 09:44 +0200, Ingo wrote:
> The reason why I didn't make an abstraction for the "debyte" is that I
> wanted to keep the number of files and dependencies as low as possible. I
> think this was the original idea of the rewrite, right?
Yeah, exactly. I would like to be able to in
- Original Message -
> From: Mathieu Bouchard
> To: adam sanches
> Cc: pd-list@iem.at
> Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2011 1:51 AM
> Subject: Re: [PD] Selecting random wavefile from folder without knowing the
> names
>
> Le 2011-09-14 à 22:14:00, adam sanches a écrit :
>
>> Hi, how c
The reason why I didn't make an abstraction for the "debyte" is that I
wanted to keep the number of files and dependencies as low as possible. I
think this was the original idea of the rewrite, right?
Anyway what can be done is add a simple offset number like I did it
somewhere on my testing patch
19 matches
Mail list logo
