On Thu, 2010-12-23 at 13:12 +0100, Dietrich Pank wrote: > > I think I understand the basic theory. > > Experience is something else... e.g. > > line~ and metro doesn't work sample correct even in block~ > size 1 > > > Interesting. How did you test that? > > > vline~ doesn't work in block~ sizes <64 > > > I'm surprised. Again, how did you test it? > > > good question :) > patch attached.
I'm afraid I didn't fully understand the idea of the patch. I mean, I understood the basic idea. But why are you assuming, that 2 samples and 3 samples are the smallest possible ramps that can be achieved with [vline~] and [line~]? Also I'm not clear, what kind of signal [vline~] and [line~] are supposed to produce. They don't accept the same message format. [vline~] takes up to three arguments (<target value>, <ramp time>, <delay>), while [line~] takes only two (<target values>, <ramp time>). Check the help file for the specifics. Anyway, your patch makes a few things quite clear. * Changing the blocksize for the [metro] / [metroplus] doesn't matter * The blocksize doesn't affect [vline~] as long as it is >= 64 samples. * [line~] schedules ramps only on block boundaries, so when setting high blocksizes, one might has to wait a long time until it starts the ramp. Roman _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
