Re: [PD] debian etch vs lenny (was Re: PdExtended autobuild)

On Thursday 17 April 2008 14:36, Frank Barknecht wrote: AFAIK the open source ATi drivers don't support 3D-accel yet, so it seems, Intel cards are currently the fastest cards with open source 3D-accel on Linux. The NEW, scratch-written ati drivers (radeonhd) don't support GL yet, but the

Re: [PD] Pd sounds better than Max?

On Sunday 09 March 2008 19:59, Charles Henry wrote: Pd for 64-bit processors could potentially redefine t_sample as a double, with no loss in performance (with nearly twice as much memory usage). Mno... It just so happens that x87s always compute a double, so it makes little difference

[PD] 2D pad

Hi, What do most people do when they need a simple 2D slider, or 'xy pad'? I've tried encapsulating a data structure in a GOP abstraction, but I find it terribly unreliable. robert. ___ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management

Re: [PD] 2D pad

On Wednesday 24 October 2007 21:40, Frank Barknecht wrote: Dug it up, attached. Ciao Thanks - I'll have a look at this. My ds abstractions can never properly decide their painting order and often cause segfaults. robert. ___ PD-list@iem.at

Re: [PD] Nothing shows up in pd main window

On Monday 27 August 2007 20:05, Kevin McCoy wrote: So we will see anti-aliased fonts when tcl/tk8.5 is implemented?? Cool :) Kevin For something like pd, I'd pick lightning fast ui redraws over aa text any day of the week. robert. ___

Re: [PD] SMP Questions

On Tuesday 21 August 2007 22:25, Tim Blechmann wrote: i somehow doubt, that i would make sense to use a jackdmp-style multicore scheduling algorithm for a max/pd/nova dsp graph, which can easily contain thousands of nodes (jack graphs are usually rather small), because of the scheduling

Re: [PD] difference send and using msg with ;

On Wednesday 22 August 2007 13:18, Mathieu Bouchard wrote: making DS and pointers work again. The reason I ended up abandoning data structures was, as far as I could see, the only way to get data from them was by polling them. Which I found ridiculous. I found it was much easier and less

Re: [PD] difference send and using msg with ;

On Tuesday 21 August 2007 06:05, Chris McCormick wrote: My 2 Zimbabwe dollars: I agree that there is no nice reason for those clumps, and one more inconsistency in Pd would do more good than bad in this case. I would say making $0 do the same thing in message boxes and abstraction arguments

Re: [PD] difference send and using msg with ;

On Tuesday 21 August 2007 19:56, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: as frank has said, at the same time we could make sure that we are running an actual version of Pd (or try, whether the requested feature is already implemented...) :-) I've only just updated to 0.40. So far it's just solved two of my

Re: [PD] Re-targeting sends.

On Sunday 19 August 2007 04:50, Miller Puckette wrote: I can't remember when I put it in, but send with no arguments now sprouts a second inlet to set the receiver. cheers Miller *goes to update his pd* This sort of thing makes me happy. Thanks all. robert.

[PD] Re-targeting sends.

Hi all, Quick question - is there a way to set a new target object for a [send], in the same way it is possible to send a [set xyz( to a [receive~] to change its source? Thanks, robert. ___ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and

Re: [PD] Re-targeting sends.

On Sunday 19 August 2007 02:52, marius schebella wrote: you can use a message and stat with semicolon followed by the location you want to send to: [;receiver1 123( or with variables: [receiver1 123( [;$1 $2( that will send 123 to receiver1. marius. I'd never thought to use a $ as