[PD] libpd 0.13.2

2022-12-15 Thread Dan Wilcox
Howdy all, to follow on 0.53-1, libpd 0.13.2 is now available with the main update being... pd 0.53-1. :) https://github.com/libpd/libpd Dan Wilcox @danomatika danomatika.com robotcowboy.com

Re: [PD] Why sliders width changed?

2022-12-15 Thread Alexandre Torres Porres
Em qui., 15 de dez. de 2022 às 18:05, IOhannes m zmölnig escreveu: > a formula is probably not so interesting. > agreed ___ Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] Why sliders width changed?

2022-12-15 Thread IOhannes m zmölnig
On 12/15/22 18:34, José de Abreu wrote: interesting, so what is the relationship between the font size and the width? there is a formula? a formula is probably not so interesting. the logic for the iemgui sizes is, to make them appear at the same size as "normal" objects. that is: a hslider

Re: [PD] Why sliders width changed?

2022-12-15 Thread José de Abreu
interesting, so what is the relationship between the font size and the width? there is a formula? i was documenting default values for the appendix idea in the manual, but since each font would change the width/height i will need to change it then (and for other guis too)... and maybe just

Re: [PD] Why sliders width changed?

2022-12-15 Thread Alexandre Torres Porres
If your font size is 8 then it's still 128 pixels by default in width (15 in height), but iemguis now adapt in height and width according to font size, which I think makes sense and follows the height standard of objects that also change according to font size. Em qui., 15 de dez. de 2022 às

[PD] Why sliders width changed?

2022-12-15 Thread José de Abreu
Hey list, this is more of a curiosity question. Sliders used to have 128 of width, and with a default range of 0 to 127 it allowed the slider only to make "integers" as output. Now, new sliders have 170 of width and the same o to 127 range. Then each step isn't of size 1 anymore... So just for

Re: [PD] [random] and seed value

2022-12-15 Thread IOhannes m zmoelnig
On 12/14/22 23:55, Julian Brooks wrote: Yes, I'm one of those... then i think you should start setting an explicit seed right now. the simplest way i've found to force the currently hardcoded seed (for the first instantiated random generater), is something like this: 1. seed the random