actually, i think millers take on this is still the best idea and since there is also a sc~ external for max, max could be used as a mere canvas :-) but one still would have to come up with some impressive music ;-) (whatever that might mean)
how about inventing a composer named "donatién collidus" and reach out to the supercolliders for a collaborative effort? i´d happily provide assistance with my maxlicense in wrapping it all up. hans www.hans-w-koch.net Am 04.01.2012 um 00:24 schrieb [email protected]: > Message: 2 > Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2012 15:24:06 -0800 (PST) > From: Jonathan Wilkes <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [PD] no pd?? > To: Richie Cyngler <[email protected]>, Mathieu Bouchard > <[email protected]> > Cc: servando barreiro <[email protected]>, Miller Puckette > <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > Message-ID: > <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 > > Exactly.? You'd essentially write the same patch twice-- once completely in > Max, and if it gets accepted then with Pd and wrap it in a [pd~] object. > > OR: > > In fact you could just work with the subset of objects that are exactly the > same between the two environments: > [cos~] > [phasor~] > [biquad~] > and so on. > > Then just make sure you don't have whitespace inside [expr] or [expr~], and > you could really just write the whole thing once in Pd, submit it as a Max > patch, and perform it as a Pd patch. > > That would be the most effective way to show the idiocy of the way the call > was written. > > > -Jonathan _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
