is there a reason for omitting the subject? On 2010-04-12 21:11, Paulo Casaes wrote: > netsend and netreceive can send any type of message. You should look > into OSC for your needs.
well afaics, OSC doesn't give you any advantage with the original problems.
the problem seems to be related to Pd's messages rather than the
net-objects (e.g. "[blu( -> [send val1 $1(" won't work, but if you use
"[symbol blu(" it will; see the Pd-documentation and the list archives
for why this is so)
>
> In a related question, what is the difference between netsend and
> sendOSC?
#0 i don't know whether i have said this before, but just in case:
[sendOSC] is unmaintained and buggy, and i would suggest to not use it.
use mrpeach's [packOSC] and [udpsend] instead.
#1 they are different objects; [netsend] uses FUDI (which looks just
like Pd-messages) as the application layer protocol, whereas [sendOSC]
oses OSC
> Can netsend and netreceive be used for OSC?
no.
they are different, non-compatible application layer protocols (OSC uses
binary data enriched with meta-data, whereas Pd's FUDI is plain text
with a special meaning of semicolon)
you can probably construct an OSC-message that is parseable as a FUDI
message and vice-versa, but nothing that i would "use".
fgmasr
IOhannes
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
