On Wed, Jan 25, 2023 at 05:34:48PM +0100, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
conceptually, i like this; though i would suggest "channels=0; length=64" (or whatever).
yep - and in fact I need length to be correct, otherwise there's no easy way to get it.
and instead of (for example) sp[2] = signal_swapforchans(sp[2], outchans); you'd just write signal_setchans(sp[2], ouchans).
hmm, wouldn't that modify the t_signal* struct that sp[2] points to, potentially breaking the reuse? (so it ought to be "signal_setchans(&sp[2], outchans)")
I _think_ it works just to pass sp[2] in place - it's a (t_signal *) and all that's needed is to alter member element s_vec, s_nchans.
and i find the "swapforchans" slightly confusing (which fo(u)r channels are being swapped? the actual swapping is done by re-assigning a new value to sp[2]). so how about: sp[2] = signal_makemultichannels(sp[2], outchans);
so this would become moot.
Pd-dev mailing list Pd-dev@lists.iem.at https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev