Thanks, folks, there's a lot to think about there. Another workshop this evening, so we'll see what we find most useful.
Yeah, the lack of a subject was a sheer accident on my part. Cheers Andrew > Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 09:29:37 +0200 > From: zmoel...@iem.at > CC: pd-list@iem.at > Subject: [PD] networking with Pd (was Re: (no subject)) > > is there a reason for omitting the subject? > > On 2010-04-12 21:11, Paulo Casaes wrote: > > netsend and netreceive can send any type of message. You should look > > into OSC for your needs. > > well afaics, OSC doesn't give you any advantage with the original problems. > the problem seems to be related to Pd's messages rather than the > net-objects (e.g. "[blu( -> [send val1 $1(" won't work, but if you use > "[symbol blu(" it will; see the Pd-documentation and the list archives > for why this is so) > > > > > In a related question, what is the difference between netsend and > > sendOSC? > > #0 i don't know whether i have said this before, but just in case: > [sendOSC] is unmaintained and buggy, and i would suggest to not use it. > use mrpeach's [packOSC] and [udpsend] instead. > > #1 they are different objects; [netsend] uses FUDI (which looks just > like Pd-messages) as the application layer protocol, whereas [sendOSC] > oses OSC > > > Can netsend and netreceive be used for OSC? > > no. > they are different, non-compatible application layer protocols (OSC uses > binary data enriched with meta-data, whereas Pd's FUDI is plain text > with a special meaning of semicolon) > > you can probably construct an OSC-message that is parseable as a FUDI > message and vice-versa, but nothing that i would "use". > > fgmasr > IOhannes > _________________________________________________________________ http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/195013117/direct/01/
_______________________________________________ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list