If it's coming from the X, can't you switch off autorepeat in the X ?
Granted, I cannot find the correct documentaiton as to how to do it at
the shell level, but the XkeyboardControl structure contains a flag to
set it off or on... So there must be a way... Like xset -r ?
...............
int auto_repeat_mode;/* AutoRepeatModeOff, AutoRepeatModeOn,
AutoRepeatModeDefault */
} XKeyboardControl;
Just a thought...
It does not work on the computer where I am sitting but that may be
because I am logged in over the network using SSH on a PuTTy terminal
from a Windows machien, so nobody can figure out who's responsible for
the key repeats.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Behalf Of ugur guney
> Sent: 29 May 2007 12:28
> To: Claude Heiland-Allen
> Cc: pd-list
> Subject: Re: [PD] Behavoir of [keyup] in Linux
>
> # Adding a delay worked well. But something is surprising.
> The [delay] have to be longer than 0.1 to block this
> oscillating behavior. I'm attaching a patch (delaykey.pd)
> which shows the implementation. I think X11 gives the "key
> pressed" message in every 40 msec's or something. So 0.1
> delay is not enough to block these messages.
> # and I'm attaching the abstracion I was using in Windows
> too. (keybin.pd, keybin-help.pd)
> -ugur-
>
>
> On 5/29/07, Claude Heiland-Allen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> ugur guney wrote:
> > # When I press and hold a key, after a short time
> [keyup] starts to output
> > the number of that key repeatedly (before releasing
> it). In Windows it only
> > outputs the key no when a key is released.
>
>
> It's just the way X11 works, as far as I understand it.
> I did a test
> with GridFlow, and the same thing happens (console log
> from attached patch):
>
> Here the first number is the elapsed time since the
> previous event
> (measured in Pd logical time). It would be possible to patch up
> something that would discard any "keyrelease
> immediately-followed-by
> keypress for the same key" pairs that occur with an
> elapsed time of 0
> (hint: it would use [delay 0.1] or so, maybe even
> [delay 0] would work).
> The last keyrelease would be delayed a little, but it
> would either be
> unnoticeable with [delay 0.1] or at exactly the same
> logical time with
> [delay 0]
>
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
