Re: [PD] writesf~ time to flush to disk…?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 2013-10-01 18:47, Dan Wilcox wrote: Speaking of bangs doing the job, I wish [tabread] had a right outlet that banged when you gave it an out of bound index. I was trying to make a vanilla version of [tabdump] and that would allow me to know when I've read the whole table without needing to know it's size explicitly. so far i know of are two options: - - being not entirely vanilla and use [expr size($s1)] to query the tablesize at runtime (without requiring the user to provide it manually) - - stay entirely vanilla with Pd-0.45 and use [array get] which is a more powerful replacement for [tabdump] most compiled objects within zexy are there because i haven't found a way to implement them in vanilla (some are there because a vanilla implementation ist simply to slow; and the rest is there for vaniyt reasons) fasrm IOhannes -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.14 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Icedove - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJSS9FjAAoJELZQGcR/ejb4UUUP+gPnvxs5SpNXl3A9KbC18y2v PLxl75yeloG5f60H8dLAzWdvCwvUAkpqgaCzesBNjDpJu/eDK8YWhXZz9sbP7EXm Q3DVzByXzavsgc1xAw1M8s4RAltlwdtvd5JZwRTgn862k+iCPn2UwFk3Em2JcdN0 f8pxj4m9KR6vXpRhfXZH1ZcdiGIltHC9uUAgBy/9e/e03uP5aaTju2iKgXhVb8jW 0OROQb9fhQTVYzG7OrYt+1zxMCWV2BrQVxTbFgbJxYuxIHgKLoNwEbG/2NhrNFLD +Gv98kjCp1R2bnn6EmTJiPk6zj7QsFe2oZmvw0a8ghSIQYo3H7S4eVJaHy8ng7rt F9Va66XGvG1p6K0IObnErvAJnDYDbj7PrF9kQL0vG256JkMJzqSxpSVstcnG0iLW D3JhXpq0Mnp0p7ZOwfCkXWuzNvOhFt22dYYqdkvYaUQkF4a12h6rzCWlXI/KsZRB Fm6gWgAPKBx6dYwGrLAaln0tNeVSCekU55ZALtNl7apjOsJik8KJbSZI0jXalOiU DxVTlj0mRCw3QrD7jzi1vShbU/z/QtzwLm317wwc8EjnGmUIMuxUntUqdkac74Pr 8taNqut6DVSELG2L4x148Q+DE9hklB1aTV0iBKLjmRKRhCfe4SG/+OcQoVTkvu4p 5nJgRFw1MiGS/OGBa9d5 =uxQ7 -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] writesf~ time to flush to disk…?
Hi, On 30.09.2013 17:22, Jamie Bullock wrote: Hi folks, The documentation for writesf~ states that: You need not provide any disk access time between open and start, but between stop and the next open you must give the object time to flush all the output to disk This suggests that once writesf~ has received a stop after writing to disk, there is no way to determine whether i) writesf~ is ready to receive another open or ii) the file written to disk is ready for reading. Could an outlet be added to writesf~, outputing the number of samples written to disk? The parent patch could then use this outlet to establish when writesf~ is ready to receive another open. I like the idea, but the outlet could just output a bang, when it is done, otherwise how do you determine that writesf~ has written all samples to disk? Best regards, Thomas -- Spielen Sie Strip Schnipp-Schnapp? (Adam Weishaupt to Johann Wolfgang von Goethe in: Robert Shea Robert A. Wilson, The Golden Apple) http://www.residuum.org/ ___ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] writesf~ time to flush to disk…?
On 1 Oct 2013, at 09:27, Thomas Mayer tho...@residuum.org wrote: On 30.09.2013 17:22, Jamie Bullock wrote: Could an outlet be added to writesf~, outputing the number of samples written to disk? The parent patch could then use this outlet to establish when writesf~ is ready to receive another open. I like the idea, but the outlet could just output a bang, when it is done, otherwise how do you determine that writesf~ has written all samples to disk? I meant that it should just output the _total_ samples written after it has flushed to disk. This would be consistent with the behaviour of [soundfiler] I believe. But yes, a bang would do the job. best, Jamie ___ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] writesf~ time to flush to disk…?
Speaking of bangs doing the job, I wish [tabread] had a right outlet that banged when you gave it an out of bound index. I was trying to make a vanilla version of [tabdump] and that would allow me to know when I've read the whole table without needing to know it's size explicitly. On Oct 1, 2013, at 6:00 PM, pd-list-requ...@iem.at wrote: From: Jamie Bullock ja...@jamiebullock.com Subject: Re: [PD] writesf~ time to flush to disk…? Date: October 1, 2013 5:26:49 PM GMT+08:00 To: Thomas Mayer tho...@residuum.org Cc: pd-list@iem.at On 1 Oct 2013, at 09:27, Thomas Mayer tho...@residuum.org wrote: On 30.09.2013 17:22, Jamie Bullock wrote: Could an outlet be added to writesf~, outputing the number of samples written to disk? The parent patch could then use this outlet to establish when writesf~ is ready to receive another open. I like the idea, but the outlet could just output a bang, when it is done, otherwise how do you determine that writesf~ has written all samples to disk? I meant that it should just output the _total_ samples written after it has flushed to disk. This would be consistent with the behaviour of [soundfiler] I believe. But yes, a bang would do the job. best, Jamie Dan Wilcox @danomatika danomatika.com robotcowboy.com ___ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
[PD] writesf~ time to flush to disk…?
Hi folks, The documentation for writesf~ states that: You need not provide any disk access time between open and start, but between stop and the next open you must give the object time to flush all the output to disk This suggests that once writesf~ has received a stop after writing to disk, there is no way to determine whether i) writesf~ is ready to receive another open or ii) the file written to disk is ready for reading. Could an outlet be added to writesf~, outputing the number of samples written to disk? The parent patch could then use this outlet to establish when writesf~ is ready to receive another open. Jamie ___ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
