On Mon, 7 Mar 2011, Jonathan Wilkes wrote:
I know, but I think your suggestion is cleaner-- you can get then number
of args by [$@(--[list length] so $# isn't needed, and as you point out,
having a way of saying put args from $n and up in this object box is
very useful.
But what would be
PS: the [delwrite~] clear method
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailaid=3170987group_id=557
36atid=478072
is still assigned to nobody, because it's waiting for any
of the five project admins to click on a button... It also
didn't appear on pd-...@iem.at
either :
--- On Thu, 3/31/11, Mathieu Bouchard ma...@artengine.ca wrote:
From: Mathieu Bouchard ma...@artengine.ca
Subject: Re: [PD] Get list of a the arguments of a patch without using any
external?
To: Jonathan Wilkes jancs...@yahoo.com
Cc: pd-list@iem.at
Date: Thursday, March 31, 2011, 3:40 AM
On Wed, 9 Mar 2011, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
so who is the most competent person for a certain ticket? and can we
expect a submitter to know?
There is no book.
I don't know what you mean. I don't recall ever allowed to assign anything
to anyone, in the 6 years or so that I had been on
On Wed, 9 Mar 2011, Chris McCormick wrote:
PS: the [delwrite~] clear method is still assigned to 'nobody', because
it's waiting for any of the five project admins to click on a button...
It implies that the application of the [delwrite~] clear method patch
has been too slow for your liking,
On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 12:43:01PM -0500, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
On Wed, 9 Mar 2011, Chris McCormick wrote:
PS: the [delwrite~] clear method is still assigned to 'nobody',
because it's waiting for any of the five project admins to click on a
button... It implies that the application of the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 2011-03-08 20:08, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
On Tue, 8 Mar 2011, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
it's very simple:
each patch is assigned to a person (well, let's assume it is).
Why can we assume that each patch has been assigned to a person ?
On Wed, 9 Mar 2011, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
On 2011-03-08 20:08, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
Why can we assume that each patch has been assigned to a person ? (What
has to happen before that step ?)
it has to get assigned to a person.
this can either be done at commit time or later.
Excuse me
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 2011-03-09 15:25, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
it has to get assigned to a person.
this can either be done at commit time or later.
Excuse me ? I thought that the process of assignation was just so that
each ticket is handled by the person most
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 2011-03-08 08:02, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
On Tue, 8 Mar 2011, Chris McCormick wrote:
Do you think that what you have written above is likely to increase or
decrease
your chances of getting those patches accepted more quickly?
If I hadn't
On Tue, 8 Mar 2011, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
iirc, this was discussed on the pd-dev list prior to enabling the feature.
Is reading pd-dev a requirement for people who submit to the
patchtracker ?
___
| Mathieu Bouchard
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 2011-03-08 06:34, Jonathan Wilkes wrote:
I think a better question would be put to Miller or Hans, or the other
admins-- can someone please explain how the patch review process works?
it's very simple:
each patch is assigned to a person
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 2011-03-08 09:47, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
On Tue, 8 Mar 2011, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
iirc, this was discussed on the pd-dev list prior to enabling the
feature.
Is reading pd-dev a requirement for people who submit to the patchtracker ?
On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 09:34:52PM -0800, Jonathan Wilkes wrote:
--- On Tue, 3/8/11, Chris McCormick ch...@mccormick.cx wrote:
Do you think that what you have written above is likely to
increase or decrease
your chances of getting those patches accepted more
quickly? I ask this
question
Hi,
On Tue, Mar 08, 2011 at 12:13:10AM -0500, Ivica Ico Bukvic wrote:
FWIW, I would say if a patch is good then it does not matter what he wrote.
If it does matter, then it's everyone's loss...
Interesting point, but I think it ignores the reality of writing software
cooperatively. FLOSS is a
--- On Tue, 3/8/11, IOhannes m zmoelnig zmoel...@iem.at wrote:
From: IOhannes m zmoelnig zmoel...@iem.at
Subject: Re: [PD] Get list of a the arguments of a patch without using any
external?
To: pd-list@iem.at
Date: Tuesday, March 8, 2011, 9:51 AM
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash:
On Tue, 8 Mar 2011, Chris McCormick wrote:
This is not realistic. If you look at any large FLOSS project, patches
lie dormant, are ignored, are rejected for the wrong reasons all of the
time. Submit a patch to the Linux kernel and see what happens. Most
likely it will be silently dropped.
On Tue, 8 Mar 2011, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
it's very simple:
each patch is assigned to a person (well, let's assume it is).
Why can we assume that each patch has been assigned to a person ? (What
has to happen before that step ?)
whenever the assignee feels like it, they would browse
On Tue, 8 Mar 2011, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
On 2011-03-08 09:47, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
On Tue, 8 Mar 2011, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
iirc, this was discussed on the pd-dev list prior to enabling the
feature.
Is reading pd-dev a requirement for people who submit to the patchtracker ?
i
On Tue, Mar 08, 2011 at 12:31:43PM -0500, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
On Tue, 8 Mar 2011, Chris McCormick wrote:
This is not realistic. If you look at any large FLOSS project, patches
lie dormant, are ignored, are rejected for the wrong reasons all of the
time. Submit a patch to the Linux
Hello everyone,
I was wondering if there is a way in pure-vanilla Pd to retrieve the
list of arguments of an abstraction. I use zexy's [dollarg] for this,
but I'm making an effort to see if I can use Pd vanilla only for some
abstractions. Is there a way to do this in Pd vanilla?
Thanks,
--
Sorry -- there's no way to do that!
Miller
On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 11:50:16AM -0500, Alexandre Quessy wrote:
Hello everyone,
I was wondering if there is a way in pure-vanilla Pd to retrieve the
list of arguments of an abstraction. I use zexy's [dollarg] for this,
but I'm making an effort to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 2011-03-07 17:50, Alexandre Quessy wrote:
Hello everyone,
I was wondering if there is a way in pure-vanilla Pd to retrieve the
list of arguments of an abstraction. I use zexy's [dollarg] for this,
most likely not, as there is no such object in
Can't you simply do [f $arg_num] or [symbol $arg_num] inside the patch for
each of the arguments and send them out with a loadbang? Granted this won't
generate a list buy you could easily pack it below.
Ico
-Original Message-
From: pd-list-boun...@iem.at
Right. We discussed before somewhere on the list but I
couldn't figure out where. Here's the same solution but only using a
subpatch. Just use testab.pd as an abstraction, give it some args,
and bang [pd get-my-args] to get your args.
(Then just copy/paste [pd get-my-args] into any
I think Jonathan Wilkes had a different approach as well, which I hope
he'll post.
MB
On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 2:28 PM, Matt Barber brbrof...@gmail.com wrote:
If you need to get the arguments to use within the abstraction
instance itself, you can do it using the [list-argv] patch I've
attached
On Mon, 7 Mar 2011, Jack wrote:
I just try to write an abstraction. I don't know if it could help you,
it is just a try.
Doesn't work with arguments that contain $0 or $1 or such.
___
| Mathieu Bouchard tél:
On Mon, 7 Mar 2011, Miller Puckette wrote:
Sorry -- there's no way to do that!
Yes there is a way to do it, but it takes 5 hours to find out how to do it
in pd, while it takes 5 minutes to edit the C code so that people can do
it in pd in 5 seconds. But most of all it takes 0.5 second to
--- On Mon, 3/7/11, Mathieu Bouchard ma...@artengine.ca wrote:
From: Mathieu Bouchard ma...@artengine.ca
Subject: Re: [PD] Get list of a the arguments of a patch without using any
external?
To: Miller Puckette m...@ucsd.edu
Cc: pd-list@iem.at
Date: Monday, March 7, 2011, 9:07 PM
On Mon,
On Mon, 7 Mar 2011, Jonathan Wilkes wrote:
matju,
How long would it take you to implement the $@ thingy that you
commented on in the patch tracker? That would be a big step forward and
would surely get included in pd-ext and pd-l2ork.
(I would try my hand at it, but I move at turtle
--- On Mon, 3/7/11, Mathieu Bouchard ma...@artengine.ca wrote:
From: Mathieu Bouchard ma...@artengine.ca
Subject: Re: [PD] Get list of a the arguments of a patch without using any
external?
To: Jonathan Wilkes jancs...@yahoo.com
Cc: Miller Puckette m...@ucsd.edu, pd-list@iem.at
Date:
On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 03:07:08PM -0500, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
On Mon, 7 Mar 2011, Miller Puckette wrote:
Sorry -- there's no way to do that!
Yes there is a way to do it, but it takes 5 hours to find out how to do
it in pd, while it takes 5 minutes to edit the C code so that people can
FWIW, I would say if a patch is good then it does not matter what he wrote. If
it does matter, then it's everyone's loss...
Chris McCormick ch...@mccormick.cx wrote:
On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 03:07:08PM -0500, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
On Mon, 7 Mar 2011, Miller Puckette wrote:
Sorry -- there's
--- On Tue, 3/8/11, Chris McCormick ch...@mccormick.cx wrote:
From: Chris McCormick ch...@mccormick.cx
Subject: Re: [PD] Get list of a the arguments of a patch without using any
external?
To: pd-list@iem.at
Date: Tuesday, March 8, 2011, 5:56 AM
On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 03:07:08PM
-0500,
On Tue, 8 Mar 2011, Chris McCormick wrote:
Do you think that what you have written above is likely to increase or decrease
your chances of getting those patches accepted more quickly?
If I hadn't written it, I wouldn't have been reminded of the existence of
the delwrite patch in a manner
35 matches
Mail list logo
