Re: [PD-dev] converting OSCx to a template library
On 10/20/2012 01:26 AM, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: I'm not going to take on the maintenance of those patches, so just copying them into Pd-extended is not an option. I'm think Pd-extended should have an 'oscx' compatible library , and 'oscx' is already there, tested, etc. etc means known to be buggy unmaintained. i'm not arguing against OSCx because of it's architectural flaws but because it's not working as it should. mfgdsrt IOhannes ___ Pd-dev mailing list Pd-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
Re: [PD-dev] converting OSCx to a template library
On 10/20/2012 04:07 AM, IOhannes m zmölnig wrote: On 10/20/2012 01:26 AM, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: I'm not going to take on the maintenance of those patches, so just copying them into Pd-extended is not an option. I'm think Pd-extended should have an 'oscx' compatible library , and 'oscx' is already there, tested, etc. etc means known to be buggy unmaintained. i'm not arguing against OSCx because of it's architectural flaws but because it's not working as it should. I'd happily ditch it if there was a drop in replacement. For example, I've had many students come to me with the most popular Processing -- Pd starter patch, and its based on oscx. If it wasn't include, that patch would not work at all. So buggy but working is still better than not at all. .hc ___ Pd-dev mailing list Pd-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
Re: [PD-dev] converting OSCx to a template library
On 10/20/2012 04:17 PM, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: I'd happily ditch it if there was a drop in replacement. For example, I've had many students come to me with the most popular Processing-- Pd starter patch, and its based on oscx. If it wasn't include, that patch would not work at all. So buggy but working is still better than not at all. so what is wrong with my patches? they _are_ drop-in replacements. if those students use PdX (with [initbang]) one could even writen [OSCroute] wrapper. gsmdft IOhannes ___ Pd-dev mailing list Pd-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
Re: [PD-dev] converting OSCx to a template library
On 10/20/2012 11:56 AM, IOhannes m zmölnig wrote: On 10/20/2012 04:17 PM, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: I'd happily ditch it if there was a drop in replacement. For example, I've had many students come to me with the most popular Processing-- Pd starter patch, and its based on oscx. If it wasn't include, that patch would not work at all. So buggy but working is still better than not at all. so what is wrong with my patches? they _are_ drop-in replacements. if those students use PdX (with [initbang]) one could even writen [OSCroute] wrapper. I don't know if anything is wrong with them or not, or whether they are fully compatible or not. I can't take on the maintenance of any more libraries, so I'm not going to test them. I encourage you to take it on if you think its important. oscx is there and already included, that's my point. .hc ___ Pd-dev mailing list Pd-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
[PD-dev] [ pure-data-Bugs-3578746 ] Seriously! A non-2^n-BS bug!
Bugs item #3578746, was opened at 2012-10-20 10:47 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by nobody You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=478070aid=3578746group_id=55736 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Seriously! A non-2^n-BS bug! Initial Comment: I'm really not a 'spammer'! ...nor a hypochondriac... I've tested several versions of pd (0.42.5 - 0.43.3 (ext/van)). None of them is working with non-2^n-BSes! On the mailing-list ( http://www.mail-archive.com/pd-dev@iem.at/msg11344.html ), Claude Heiland-Allen states that it is already implemented.. (Thanks Claude) But I can't confirm that. I've tried the patch he posted there, - without success: The blocksize is always rounded to the next bigger power of 2, it seems! I don't know what he's on, but I'm on windows. Maybe that makes the difference.. (Is this a hardware- or Os-dependent feature..??) Please take a look at the attached pd-patch. It's my attempt to work out the problem.. If someone could give me a resonable answer, I promise I'll never come back again ;) ...for this issue... PS: It feels a little annoying if one does not get a real response or not a response at all! (Eg. look at the feature requests. The last one on the 1st page is like 2 years old, so you can't say there are too many to respond to each one..). This especially is true if the response is longer than the acual answer like Yes, No or I don't know. That would have been a big help for me already. Although it's not making the bug disappear automatically... Anything like if it is a useful/good idea is something I'd like to know, when posting something, for exapmle.. But no, I won't be scared away so easily.. -- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=478070aid=3578746group_id=55736 ___ Pd-dev mailing list Pd-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
Re: [PD-dev] converting OSCx to a template library
- Original Message - From: Hans-Christoph Steiner h...@at.or.at To: pd-dev@iem.at Cc: Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2012 1:13 PM Subject: Re: [PD-dev] converting OSCx to a template library On 10/20/2012 11:56 AM, IOhannes m zmölnig wrote: On 10/20/2012 04:17 PM, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: I'd happily ditch it if there was a drop in replacement. For example, I've had many students come to me with the most popular Processing-- Pd starter patch, and its based on oscx. If it wasn't include, that patch would not work at all. So buggy but working is still better than not at all. so what is wrong with my patches? they _are_ drop-in replacements. if those students use PdX (with [initbang]) one could even writen [OSCroute] wrapper. I don't know if anything is wrong with them or not, or whether they are fully compatible or not. I can't take on the maintenance of any more libraries, so I'm not going to test them. I encourage you to take it on if you think its important. oscx is there and already included, that's my point. Isn't he just fixing the existing library? .hc ___ Pd-dev mailing list Pd-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev ___ Pd-dev mailing list Pd-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
