x patches.
Ingo
> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> Von: pd-list-boun...@iem.at [mailto:pd-list-boun...@iem.at] Im Auftrag von
> Ingo
> Gesendet: Freitag, 16. September 2011 16:42
> An: 'Claude Heiland-Allen'; pd-list@iem.at
> Betreff: Re: [PD] pduino rewrite
>
> Hi Claude,
>
Hi Claude,
> > When I started I thought it was very convenient to use wireless
> > [send/receive] objects to send midi data to the sample-voices (which it
> is).
> [snip]
> > Sending 3,000 messages to 8,000 [receive] objects adds up to 24 million
> > times per second that the individual [receive]
Hi Ingo,
On 16/09/11 13:02, Ingo wrote:
When I started I thought it was very convenient to use wireless
[send/receive] objects to send midi data to the sample-voices (which it is).
[snip]
Sending 3,000 messages to 8,000 [receive] objects adds up to 24 million
times per second that the individu
; An: Ingo
> Cc: 'Hans-Christoph Steiner'; pd-list@iem.at
> Betreff: Re: AW: AW: AW: AW: [PD] pduino rewrite
>
> On Fri, 2011-09-16 at 14:05 +0200, Ingo wrote:
> > > Wow, I just compared your version of [pd digital message] with mine
> and
> > > yours
On Fri, 2011-09-16 at 14:05 +0200, Ingo wrote:
> > Wow, I just compared your version of [pd digital message] with mine and
> > yours takes only 180ms to process 100 of messages, while mine uses
> > over 8s.
> > Frankly, I wouldn't have expected such a big difference Let me dig
> > into this
> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> Von: Roman Haefeli [mailto:reduz...@gmail.com]
> Gesendet: Freitag, 16. September 2011 11:32
> An: Ingo
> Cc: 'Hans-Christoph Steiner'; pd-list@iem.at
> Betreff: Re: AW: AW: AW: [PD] pduino rewrite
>
> On Fri, 2011-09-16 at 05
> Wow, I just compared your version of [pd digital message] with mine and
> yours takes only 180ms to process 100 of messages, while mine uses
> over 8s.
> Frankly, I wouldn't have expected such a big difference Let me dig
> into this.
>
> Roman
That's more than I would have expected, to
On Fri, 2011-09-16 at 11:32 +0200, Roman Haefeli wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-09-16 at 05:57 +0200, Ingo wrote:
> > > 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.
On Fri, 2011-09-16 at 05:57 +0200, Ingo wrote:
> > 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 [
Wow, I just compared your version of [pd digital message] with mine and
yours takes only 180ms to process 100 of messages, while mine uses
over 8s.
Frankly, I wouldn't have expected such a big difference Let me dig
into this.
Roman
On Fri, 2011-09-16 at 05:57 +0200, Ingo wrote:
> > The
> 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
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
Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> > Von: Hans-Christoph Steiner [mailto:h...@at.or.at]
> > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 15. September 2011 17:48
> > An: Ingo
> > Cc: 'Roman Haefeli'; pd-list@iem.at
> > Betreff: Re: AW: [PD] pduino rewrite
> >
> > On Thu, 2011-0
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
it's working perfectly.
Ingo
> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> Von: Hans-Christoph Steiner [mailto:h...@at.or.at]
> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 15. September 2011 17:48
> An: Ingo
> Cc: 'Roman Haefeli'; pd-list@iem.at
> Betreff: Re: AW: [PD] pduino rewrite
>
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
> 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
x27;s digital pins.
Ingo
> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> Von: Roman Haefeli [mailto:reduz...@gmail.com]
> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 15. September 2011 08:44
> An: Ingo
> Cc: 'Hans-Christoph Steiner'; pd-list@iem.at
> Betreff: Re: AW: [PD] pduino rewrite
>
> Hi Ingo
>
> Thank
ata / [arduino]
the better.
Roman
>
> > -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> > Von: pd-list-boun...@iem.at [mailto:pd-list-boun...@iem.at] Im Auftrag von
> > Hans-Christoph Steiner
> > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 14. September 2011 22:33
> > An: Roman Haefeli
> &g
As Ingo pointed out, one bug is that [mapping/debytemask] has the
[change] object for each outlet. So probably the way to fix this is to
make a bunch of [mapping/debytemask] objects for all the possible
digital ports.
[arduino] should only output on change of digital input, and it receives
the d
On Wed, 2011-09-14 at 11:48 +0200, Ingo wrote:
> Hi Roman,
>
> thanks for taking the time looking at the code. Unfortunately your version
> will be sending even many more wrong numbers.
>
> I have put some list messages into your patch. Keep clicking onto them
> randomly and you will see that the
Hi Ingo
Thanks for all your reports.
Sorry that my replies sometimes only come a few days later. I'm still
willing to fix any outstanding issues, but not very often I find time to
get an arduino into my hands. Since sometimes I have troubles following
you and keeping your several bug reports apar
There is another thing that I just noticed about the pduino test-patch.
The mode buttons are suggesting that you can turn of all functions by
selecting "NONE". This is not true! These buttons have absolutely NO
function and should be replaced with the correct commands.
While doing this the option
Hi Roman, Olsen and Hans,
Here' a replacement object that fixes the behaviour that wrong "digital in"
pins get recognized when more than the first 6 pins are used. I hope there
is nothing else interfering with those pins anymore.
The object "digital_messages" inside the patch should be placed her
ila / Duemilanove now) and the whole thing is
going crazy now sending wrong stuff all over the place.
Ingo
> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> Von: Hans-Christoph Steiner [mailto:h...@at.or.at]
> Gesendet: Freitag, 9. September 2011 16:41
> An: Ingo
> Cc: 'Roman Haefeli&#
maybe
> they do and simply cannot figure out where the problem comes from?
>
> Ingo
>
>
> > -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> > Von: Roman Haefeli [mailto:reduz...@gmail.com]
> > Gesendet: Freitag, 9. September 2011 10:49
> > An: Ingo
> > Cc: 'olsen
from?
Ingo
> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> Von: Roman Haefeli [mailto:reduz...@gmail.com]
> Gesendet: Freitag, 9. September 2011 10:49
> An: Ingo
> Cc: 'olsen'; 'pd-list'
> Betreff: Re: AW: [PD] pduino rewrite
>
> On Fri, 2011-09-09 at 10:03 +02
On Fri, 2011-09-09 at 10:03 +0200, Ingo wrote:
> Hi Roman,
>
> I just messed around with the rewrite and - as you mentioned - you didn't
> fix any of the bugs.
>
> I even think I send you a mail about the digital pins 2 & 3 and provided a
> fix for it here at the forum. Of course it's still there
I forgot to mention: I tested with a Duemilanove.
Ingo
> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> Von: pd-list-boun...@iem.at [mailto:pd-list-boun...@iem.at] Im Auftrag von
> Ingo
> Gesendet: Freitag, 9. September 2011 10:04
> An: 'Roman Haefeli'; 'olsen'; 'pd-
Hi Roman,
I just messed around with the rewrite and - as you mentioned - you didn't
fix any of the bugs.
I even think I send you a mail about the digital pins 2 & 3 and provided a
fix for it here at the forum. Of course it's still there!
About the other things:
- The test patch has still no swi
Hi Ingo
On Fri, 2011-09-09 at 05:47 +0200, Ingo wrote:
> OK, I got it!
>
> Downloading the files didn't work (at least not on my Windows computer) but
> copying the content into a bunch of text files and renaming them did.
Hm.. is this probably due to Windows and Linux using different line
break
0 - 13 are gone.
Ingo
> Betreff: Re: [PD] pduino rewrite
>
> I could not open any patch at all! Neither Natty nor Windows XP worked.
> I am still on Pd-extended 0.42.5.
> There is a huge list of stuff (not pd library related) missing.
>
> So far this doesn't look like i
I could not open any patch at all! Neither Natty nor Windows XP worked.
I am still on Pd-extended 0.42.5.
There is a huge list of stuff (not pd library related) missing.
So far this doesn't look like it's improving any dependency problem.
Ingo
> buenas tutti
>
> roman & me did some rewrite on
This is a great start, it needed some loving. I'll check it out when I
have some time.
.hc
On Fri, 2011-09-02 at 12:20 +0200, olsen wrote:
> buenas tutti
>
> roman & me did some rewrite on the pduino - citing the README:
>
> Pduino - improved
> -
>
> All Pd patches are based
buenas tutti
roman & me did some rewrite on the pduino - citing the README:
Pduino - improved
-
All Pd patches are based on the official Pduino (version 0.5beta8)
maintained by Hans-Christoph Steiner.
The goals of the improvements are:
* Get rid of avoidable dependencies on
39 matches
Mail list logo
