Here an abstraction where there is two possibilities. There is some comments inside. I would like to know if i am right about performance ? It is what we were talking about Cyrille ? Thanx a lot. ++
Jack
hello,
i think gem load an image only when sending a load message to pix_image, so your 2 exemples should be the same.
by why do you use initbang when a loadbang is ok? where does initbang comes from?
c
Jack a écrit :
Here an abstraction where there is two possibilities. There is some comments inside. I would like to know if i am right about performance ? It is what we were talking about Cyrille ? Thanx a lot. ++
Jack
GEM-dev mailing list GEM-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/gem-dev
Le 24 juin 09 à 16:22, cyrille henry a écrit :
hello,
i think gem load an image only when sending a load message to pix_image, so your 2 exemples should be the same.
OK, thanx for clarifications. I have forgotten that :)
by why do you use initbang when a loadbang is ok? where does initbang comes from?
Because it is an abstraction loaded dynamically. ++
Jack
c
Jack a écrit :
Here an abstraction where there is two possibilities. There is some comments inside. I would like to know if i am right about performance ? It is what we were talking about Cyrille ? Thanx a lot. ++ Jack
GEM-dev mailing list GEM-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/gem-dev
Jack a écrit :
Le 24 juin 09 à 16:22, cyrille henry a écrit :
hello,
i think gem load an image only when sending a load message to pix_image, so your 2 exemples should be the same.
OK, thanx for clarifications. I have forgotten that :)
by why do you use initbang when a loadbang is ok? where does initbang comes from?
Because it is an abstraction loaded dynamically.
yep, i got it now. here what i usually do with vanilla objects only. c
++
Jack
c
Jack a écrit :
Here an abstraction where there is two possibilities. There is some comments inside. I would like to know if i am right about performance ? It is what we were talking about Cyrille ? Thanx a lot. ++ Jack
GEM-dev mailing list GEM-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/gem-dev
GEM-dev mailing list GEM-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/gem-dev
Good, I used to use something like :
[3 ( | [t b f] | | | ... | [bang( | [s banginit] (and a [r banginit] in abstractions.
and not the [loadbang( message. I have to use this method, right now.
No chance to have [initbang] in Vanilla ? http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-list/2009-05/070353.html ++
Jack
Le 24 juin 09 à 16:53, cyrille henry a écrit :
Jack a écrit :
Le 24 juin 09 à 16:22, cyrille henry a écrit :
hello,
i think gem load an image only when sending a load message to pix_image, so your 2 exemples should be the same.
OK, thanx for clarifications. I have forgotten that :)
by why do you use initbang when a loadbang is ok? where does initbang comes from?
Because it is an abstraction loaded dynamically.
yep, i got it now. here what i usually do with vanilla objects only. c
++ Jack
c
Jack a écrit :
Here an abstraction where there is two possibilities. There is some comments inside. I would like to know if i am right about performance ? It is what we were talking about Cyrille ? Thanx a lot. ++ Jack
GEM-dev mailing list GEM-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/gem-dev
GEM-dev mailing list GEM-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/gem-dev<Archive.zip>
Jack wrote:
Good, I used to use something like :
[3 ( | [t b f] | | | ... | [bang( | [s banginit] (and a [r banginit] in abstractions.
and not the [loadbang( message. I have to use this method, right now.
they are equivalent.
No chance to have [initbang] in Vanilla ? http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-list/2009-05/070353.html
well, you are asking the wrong persons here :-) i have written [initbang] about 3 years ago and am not opposed to include it in Pd-vanilla. but i have little to say on these topics....
fgamr IOhannes
-
cyrille henry -
IOhannes m zmoelnig -
Jack