Miller had a question that is still unanswered. It seems to me more
productive to keep the patch in the pending/closed state until
someone answers the question. Otherwise that seems me that it is
abandoned. The idea of the "Pending" state is to trigger a comment,
or clean up that patch if its abandoned.
.hc
On Oct 18, 2006, at 3:58 AM, SourceForge.net wrote:
Patches item #1094912, was opened at 2005-01-03 11:56
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by zmoelnig
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?
func=detail&atid=478072&aid=1094912&group_id=55736
Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the
comment thread,
including the initial issue submission, for this request,
not just the latest update.
Category: puredata
Group: wishlist
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 6
Submitted By: Tim Blechmann (timblech)
Assigned to: Miller Puckette (millerpuckette)
Summary: message-based access to the audio api
Initial Comment:
attached is a patch that simplifies message-based
access to the audio api:
pd understands the following messages:
audio-samplerate
audio-delay
audio-dacblocksize
audio-scheduler
audio-device
audio-device-in
audio-device-out
audio-dacblocksize and audio-scheduler require devel_0_38
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: IOhannes m zmölnig (zmoelnig)
Date: 2006-10-18 09:58
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=564396
as carmen has pointed out on the list, miller had just very
recently articulated a very similar idea.
even though it is unlikely that he will use the patch here,
i reopen this issue (and hopefully will close it again soon
when an equivalent mechanism will be part of pd)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Hans-Christoph Steiner (eighthave)
Date: 2006-10-17 07:41
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=27104
this has been here for a long while with no activity, so I
am setting it to Pending. It'll be automatically set to
closed after a while if no one tends to it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Hans-Christoph Steiner (eighthave)
Date: 2006-01-29 03:34
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=27104
I am liking the idea of sending messages to pd to get all of
this kind of information more and more. I am thinking that
a generic "get" message would be useful here. Like this:
[;pd get audio-samplerate(
[;pd get audio-delay(
[;pd get audio-dacblocksize(
[;pd get audio-scheduler(
[;pd get audio-device(
[;pd get audio-device-in(
[;pd get audio-device-out(
Then also:
[;pd get path(
[;pd get libs(
[;pd get version(
[;pd get dsp(
Then you could get similar messages from each canvas/patch:
[;pd-my_patch.pd get editmode(
[;pd-my_patch.pd get vis(
[;pd-my_patch.pd get namespace(
[;pd-my_patch.pd get canvasname(
You would retrieve these messages with a [receive] of the
same name, i.e.:
[r pd]
|
[route version]
|
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Miller Puckette (millerpuckette)
Date: 2005-05-18 06:36
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=313747
I'm scared of this one... how important is it to have all the
different audio parameters handled by separate messages? I
think the "audio_dialog" message should suffice for setting
audio parameters...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?
func=detail&atid=478072&aid=1094912&group_id=55736
------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you are not part of the solution, you are part of the
problem. - Eldridge Cleaver
_______________________________________________
PD-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
