Re: [PD] receiving messages in [expr] ?

2011-09-03 Thread Mathieu Bouchard
On Mon, 29 Aug 2011, Thomas Grill wrote: Am 27.08.2011 um 21:59 schrieb Mathieu Bouchard: Ears don't know what a wave function collapse is, and wouldn't differentiate quantum noise from a linear-congruential scrambler such as pd's [noise~]. i don't think that quantum noise is necessarily "white

Re: [PD] receiving messages in [expr] ?

2011-09-01 Thread Chris McCormick
On Thu, Sep 01, 2011 at 07:48:26PM -0400, Mathieu Bouchard wrote: > On Fri, 2 Sep 2011, Chris McCormick wrote: > >> Epistemic: Adjective - "Of or relating to knowledge or to the degree of >> its validation." It means I think that taking whatever currently looks >> the most impredictable thing in

Re: [PD] receiving messages in [expr] ?

2011-09-01 Thread Mathieu Bouchard
On Fri, 2 Sep 2011, Chris McCormick wrote: Epistemic: Adjective - "Of or relating to knowledge or to the degree of its validation." It means I think that taking whatever currently looks the most impredictable thing in the science book is a good approach. Don't run a lottery with Miller's [nois

Re: [PD] receiving messages in [expr] ?

2011-09-01 Thread Chris McCormick
On Thu, Sep 01, 2011 at 07:38:32PM -0400, Mathieu Bouchard wrote: > On Fri, 2 Sep 2011, Chris McCormick wrote: > >> On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 03:59:14PM -0400, Mathieu Bouchard wrote: >>> You'll have to come up with a more phenomenological approach than picking >>> whatever currently looks the most i

Re: [PD] receiving messages in [expr] ?

2011-09-01 Thread Mathieu Bouchard
On Fri, 2 Sep 2011, Chris McCormick wrote: On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 03:59:14PM -0400, Mathieu Bouchard wrote: You'll have to come up with a more phenomenological approach than picking whatever currently looks the most impredictable thing in the science book. Why? Randomness is epistemic. Wha

Re: [PD] receiving messages in [expr] ?

2011-09-01 Thread Chris McCormick
On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 03:59:14PM -0400, Mathieu Bouchard wrote: > You'll have to come up with a more phenomenological approach than picking > whatever currently looks the most impredictable thing in the science > book. Why? Randomness is epistemic. Cheers, Chris. --- http://

Re: [PD] receiving messages in [expr] ?

2011-09-01 Thread IOhannes m zmoelnig
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 2011-08-31 16:11, Michael Zacherl. wrote: > despite what IOhannes pointed out (and I still agree with him) i do not doubt that there are many use cases where it is indeed a better idea to avoid connections in favour of an accessing memory by name.

Re: [PD] receiving messages in [expr] ?

2011-08-31 Thread Michael Zacherl.
first > character is not a number, so try the following workarounds: > > [expr _$0myvalue] > [expr myvalue$0] > > Both are ugly. If using tables you can avoid this mess by using an $s > variable. > > -Jonathan > > From: Michael Zacherl. > To: PD list > Sent

Re: [PD] receiving messages in [expr] ?

2011-08-29 Thread Thomas Grill
Am 27.08.2011 um 21:59 schrieb Mathieu Bouchard: Ears don't know what a wave function collapse is, and wouldn't differentiate quantum noise from a linear-congruential scrambler such as pd's [noise~]. i don't think that quantum noise is necessarily "white" in the audible domain. gr~~~

Re: [PD] receiving messages in [expr] ?

2011-08-27 Thread Mathieu Bouchard
On Fri, 26 Aug 2011, Chris McCormick wrote: On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 11:20:47PM +0200, Thomas Grill wrote: Am 25.08.2011 um 19:40 schrieb Andrew Faraday: you can't hear noise against noise :p Interesting - but then again, what is "noise"? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave_function_collapse

Re: [PD] receiving messages in [expr] ?

2011-08-26 Thread Thomas Grill
Am 26.08.2011 um 04:06 schrieb Chris McCormick: On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 11:20:47PM +0200, Thomas Grill wrote: Am 25.08.2011 um 19:40 schrieb Andrew Faraday: you can't hear noise against noise :p Interesting - but then again, what is "noise"? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave_function_coll

Re: [PD] receiving messages in [expr] ?

2011-08-25 Thread Chris McCormick
On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 11:20:47PM +0200, Thomas Grill wrote: > Am 25.08.2011 um 19:40 schrieb Andrew Faraday: > > you can't hear noise against noise :p > > Interesting - but then again, what is "noise"? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave_function_collapse Chris. --- http://mccor

Re: [PD] receiving messages in [expr] ?

2011-08-25 Thread Thomas Grill
Am 25.08.2011 um 19:40 schrieb Andrew Faraday: > you can't hear noise against noise :p > Interesting - but then again, what is "noise"? gr~~~ -- Thomas Grill http://g.org ___ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> h

Re: [PD] receiving messages in [expr] ?

2011-08-25 Thread Andrew Faraday
Nice obvious one there, Funs, you can't hear noise against noise :p Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2011 18:17:16 +0200 Subject: Re: [PD] receiving messages in [expr] ? From: funssee...@gmail.com To: jbtur...@hotmail.com; Pd-list@iem.at On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 5:32 PM, Andrew Faraday wrote:

Re: [PD] receiving messages in [expr] ?

2011-08-25 Thread Jonathan Wilkes
>From: Michael Zacherl. >To: PD list >Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2011 11:19 AM >Subject: Re: [PD] receiving messages in [expr] ? > > >On 25.8.2011, at 14:43 , tim vets wrote: > >> something like [expr myvalue] and [v myvalue]? >> gr,

Re: [PD] receiving messages in [expr] ?

2011-08-25 Thread Funs Seelen
On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 5:32 PM, Andrew Faraday wrote: > I'm liking the look of this to streamline a few patches. Only trouble is > there doesn't seem to be an audio rate version. So Funs' patch will give you > zipper noise. [value] doesn't seem to have an audio alternative. Which is > fine as it

Re: [PD] receiving messages in [expr] ?

2011-08-25 Thread Michael Zacherl.
On 25.8.2011, at 17:43 , IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote: > generally i would suggest to avoid such hidden data sharing whenever > possible. > while it might remove a number of ugly connections, it will also remove > a number of connections telling you where the data comes from. > > connections are re

Re: [PD] receiving messages in [expr] ?

2011-08-25 Thread IOhannes m zmoelnig
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 2011-08-25 17:32, Andrew Faraday wrote: > > I'm liking the look of this to streamline a few patches. Only trouble is > there doesn't seem to be an audio rate version. So Funs' patch will give you > zipper noise. [value] doesn't seem to have an au

Re: [PD] receiving messages in [expr] ?

2011-08-25 Thread Andrew Faraday
[f], but it does mean you can't receive audio values in [expr~]... as far as I can tell. Andrew Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2011 15:21:56 +0200 From: funssee...@gmail.com To: timv...@gmail.com CC: pd-list@iem.at Subject: Re: [PD] receiving messages in [expr] ? On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 2:43 PM, tim

Re: [PD] receiving messages in [expr] ?

2011-08-25 Thread Michael Zacherl.
On 25.8.2011, at 14:43 , tim vets wrote: > something like [expr myvalue] and [v myvalue]? > gr, > Tim great, thanks Tim! any chance to get $0 working? [v $0-myvalue] is fine, [bang(--[expr $0-myvalue] (might be utterly wrong) delivers strange values, not even $0. Michael. -- noise chaser

Re: [PD] receiving messages in [expr] ?

2011-08-25 Thread Funs Seelen
On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 2:43 PM, tim vets wrote: > > something like [expr myvalue] and [v myvalue]? > gr, > Tim > > I didn't know that one. Thanks! [hsl] | [/ 127] | [v headphonesafe] [noise~] | [*~ 99] | [clip~ -1 1] | [expr~ $v1*headphonesafe] |\ | \ [dac~] --Funs _

Re: [PD] receiving messages in [expr] ?

2011-08-25 Thread tim vets
2011/8/25 Michael Zacherl. > Hi, to keep my patch tidy I'd like to use some sort of [receive] in a bunch > of [expr] objects (mostly constants to configure the patch). > I could use sub-patches and [send] the values to them there, is there an > easier way? > [expr] don't have names like arrays et