On 2/10/22 23:12, Peter P. wrote:
* IOhannes m zmoelnig [2022-02-10 13:36]:
i figure your argument is, that most of these have to learn Pd from scratch
anyhow and will eventually come to the "use [trigger]" section in the
documentation,
Just out of curiosity, are you referring to
2.3.2. dept
BTW, [vstplugin~] can now be compiled for Apple M1, with a plugin bridge
for 64-bit Intel plugins!
Unfortunately, I don't have access to an M1 (yet), so I couldn't really
test it myself. One kind soul has done it for me and said that it seemed
to work, but I would love to hear more reports!
Hi,
I am happy to announce a new bug fix release for [vstplugin~] - a Pd
external for hosting VST2 and VST3 plugins on Windows, macOS and Linux.
It is available on Deken (search for "vstplugin~"). Please upgrade!
Here is the full change log: https://git.iem.at/pd/vstplugin/-/releases
Please
Wow, triggerize I didn't know, and its super cool!
> Am 10.02.2022 um 14:58 schrieb IOhannes m zmoelnig :
>
>
> hi.
>
> it would be super-cool if you could change the subject to something
> meaningful before replying to a digest mail.
>
> On 2/10/22 14:39, Samuel Burt wrote:
>> Having used Pd
* IOhannes m zmoelnig [2022-02-10 13:36]:
> On 2/10/22 12:53, Dan Wilcox wrote:
> > I feel like often these problems also come from people trying Pd out after
> > being more familiar with Max. Perhaps it would be good if Pd included a
> > mini "Pd for Max users" guide which starts with execution
+1
I also think it would be nice to encourage users to submit their own tips to
this list as in: “click here to submit your tip of the day”.
fdch.github.io
> On Feb 10, 2022, at 2:50 PM, Julian Brooks wrote:
>
>
> +1 on this
> I still find things out re Pd that elicit a facepalm/no-way(you
If you are using Apple Mail, as I am, it doesn't natively handle Mailman digest
messages from the list. If you hit reply, it then replies to the *entire*
digest ala "Re: P-List Digest, Vol..." and thus creates a new thread instead of
building upon the previous by using the same subject line.
Wh
+1 on this
I still find things out re Pd that elicit a facepalm/no-way(you can do
_that_) moment.
Think we all get stuck in our ways too so little tips/snippets/patterns (or
known anti-patterns) would be lovely.
All best,
J
On Thu, 10 Feb 2022 at 12:37, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
> On 2/10/22 1
> but to make people aware that this might introduce message ordering
> problems.
>
> in the meantime, use triggerize (Ctrl+a Ctrl+t) to resolve all your
> fan-outs.
>
> gfmkdf
> IOhannes
> -- next part --
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
>
On Thu, 2022-02-10 at 15:00 +0100, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
>
> on a related note:
> since Pd-0.52 it is no longer possible to connect a single outlet to
> single inlet twice.
> after reading this thread , i wonder whether this was premature and
> whether we should undo that change.
Can you e
On Thu, 2022-02-10 at 10:30 +0100, Roman Haefeli wrote:
> 3) I'm personally not so fond of the idea of giving people patching
> advice.
Let me rewrite that to 'unsolicited patching advice'.
I was the other day stumbling across a not-so-trivial-to-resolve bug.
The problem turned out to be a [loadb
On 2/10/22 10:30, Roman Haefeli wrote:
2) I believe it's more valuable if people do not fanning connections
because they understand their implications rather than because a
message tells them to avoid them.
but maybe they can be made aware of the implications if they were made
explicit.
3)
hi.
it would be super-cool if you could change the subject to something
meaningful before replying to a digest mail.
On 2/10/22 14:39, Samuel Burt wrote:
Having used Pd for two decades, this still catches me occasionally. I was
that's the reason why i think that statements like "Fanning ou
t.
> >
> > 1) There are too many cases where fanning outlet connections are OK.
> >
> > 2) I believe it's more valuable if people do not fanning connections
> > because they understand their implications rather than because a
> > message tells them to avoid them
On 2/10/22 12:53, Dan Wilcox wrote:
I feel like often these problems also come from people trying Pd out after being more
familiar with Max. Perhaps it would be good if Pd included a mini "Pd for Max
users" guide which starts with execution order differences,
hmm.
i'd prefer a "tip-of-the-day
I agree, this is an established aspect of patching in Pd and changing it is not
likely possible at this point. A positive reinforcement for using trigger is
that it's simply more readable. I also admit to using fanning when I know order
isn't as important for that case,
I feel like often these
On Thu, 2022-02-10 at 10:09 +0100, Max wrote:
> Should Pd warn the user when one outlet is connected to multiple
> objects?
I'd rather want Pd not to do that.
1) There are too many cases where fanning outlet connections are OK.
2) I believe it's more valuable if people do not fanning connect
It's a bit more tricky. Fanning control outlets are not a problem per
se, only if those connections go to one or more *hot* control inlets.
Fanning out to cold control inlets is perfectly fine; some people still
like to use [trigger], but technically it doesn't make a difference.
Also, fanning
Most of the puredata tagged questions on stackoverflow are message order
bugs caused by fanning outlet connections.
Should Pd warn the user when one outlet is connected to multiple objects?
On 09.02.22 21:08, IOhannes m zmölnig wrote:
Am 9. Februar 2022 19:07:45 MEZ schrieb Samuel Burt
:
As w
19 matches
Mail list logo
