Steffen Juul wrote: > On 02/06/2008, at 14.25, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote: > >> if you (or anybody else) finds more bugs till tomorrow > > Has something happened to [pix_data] since > GEM: ver: 0.91-cvs > GEM: compiled: May 21 2008 > ? (I can't see anything in the Changelog.) > > I have a patch that uses that where the output is very different > between the two versions.
yes, [pix_data] is believed to be kind of fixed...at least it used to be. ah, looking at your compile date, it might indeed be that it was broken again when fixing [pix_mask] and so on... still, it would be nice if you could elaborate on the differences... fgmasdr IOhannes _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
