On 12/16/2011 01:05 AM, Alexandre Torres Porres wrote: > oops, I guess I didnt understand you then. > > well, I tried myself, and in max [cartopol~] matches [cartopol], That is; > they both give same results in MAX. > > Now in Pd, they don't match, [cartopol~] gives inverted phases, but > [cartopol] in Pd matches the [atas2] and [expr] versions. > > And the results in MAX also are in agreement to [atan2] and [expr] or > [cartopol] in Pd. > > So Pd's [cartopol~] is the odd one out.
i'm not sure i can follow. i think there is still some information missing. in Max, [cartopol~] and [cartopol] match. in Pd, [cartopol~] and [cartopol] are inverted. this really means: cyclone's [cartopol~] is inverted with respect to the [cartopol] you are using. cyclone's [cartopol~] is to match Max's [cartopol~], phase wise. if it doesn't, then it's a bug in cyclone. so as a first step, you should check whether they output the same in Max and Pd/cyclone, if you send them the same input. i don't know, where your [cartopol] implementation comes from. if it comes from cyclone, then it must match Max's [cartopol] implementation. if it does not, it's a bug in cyclone. if Max's [cartopol] and [cartopol~] behave differently (which they don't), then cyclone's implementations must behave differently as well. however, if the [cartopol] you are using is _not_ from cyclone, this doesn't matter at all. e.g. zexy's [cart2pol] doesn't care at all about Max and cyclone compatibility; i don't know whether they behave the same and if they don't then i'm sure i wouldn't change [cart2pol]s behaviour (as it is designed to be mathematically "correct", not to be Max compatible) fmgasdrt IOhannes
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
