Hello all,
I'd like to make a motion that [arraysize] (by Pix) be included in the main PD distribution and be considered for inclusion as a "native PD object".
My reasons:
1. PD lacks this tool and although it is available as an external, I feel that this functionality is essential and should be "internal".
2. PD object names like [getsize] and [setsize] are misleading...particularly when those reference files refer to "the size of an array". Obviously this matter would be clarified if users were presented with [arraysize] also - I'm guessing that PD users would clearly understand the different applications for these 'related' objects.
2. I have just finished writing an abstraction entitled "all_about_arrays" for PDDP which will be included as a supplement to the PDDP reference files regarding [tabread], [tabwrite], [tabsend~], [tabwhatever] etc. To demonstrate some of the "usefulness" of arrays (i.e. wave editing, concatenating two arrays, slicing and splicing arrays, joining arrays, reversing an array, etc.) I have found it necessary to use [arraysize] and I would prefer that users not have to download and install an external object just to understand these tutorials. Particularly when determining the length of an array is such a standard procedure in high level programming environments.
If anybody has any objections, I'd like to discuss this matter. Otherwise, should Miller make a decision on this?
I don't know how Pix feels about this, as I have never discussed it with him.
If all developers vote "no", then what is the best method for PDDP to include [arraysize] in the reference files? Should I link to the CVS? Should I keep an updated arraysize.dll in the downloadable zip? Should I assume that most users would have the foresight to have already downloaded arraysize.dll?
Regards, Dave Sabine
Is this array tutorial already available ? I can at least include arraysize in the CVS version if it is really necessary, for the main distribution Miller has to decide.
Guenter
On Mon, 28 Apr 2003, David Sabine wrote:
Hello all,
I'd like to make a motion that [arraysize] (by Pix) be included in the main PD distribution and be considered for inclusion as a "native PD object".
My reasons:
- PD lacks this tool and although it is available as an external, I feel
that this functionality is essential and should be "internal".
- PD object names like [getsize] and [setsize] are
misleading...particularly when those reference files refer to "the size of an array". Obviously this matter would be clarified if users were presented with [arraysize] also - I'm guessing that PD users would clearly understand the different applications for these 'related' objects.
- I have just finished writing an abstraction entitled "all_about_arrays"
for PDDP which will be included as a supplement to the PDDP reference files regarding [tabread], [tabwrite], [tabsend~], [tabwhatever] etc. To demonstrate some of the "usefulness" of arrays (i.e. wave editing, concatenating two arrays, slicing and splicing arrays, joining arrays, reversing an array, etc.) I have found it necessary to use [arraysize] and I would prefer that users not have to download and install an external object just to understand these tutorials. Particularly when determining the length of an array is such a standard procedure in high level programming environments.
If anybody has any objections, I'd like to discuss this matter. Otherwise, should Miller make a decision on this?
I don't know how Pix feels about this, as I have never discussed it with him.
If all developers vote "no", then what is the best method for PDDP to include [arraysize] in the reference files? Should I link to the CVS? Should I keep an updated arraysize.dll in the downloadable zip? Should I assume that most users would have the foresight to have already downloaded arraysize.dll?
Regards, Dave Sabine
PD-dev mailing list PD-dev@iem.kug.ac.at http://iem.kug.ac.at/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pd-dev
Hello Guenter,
Yes, I've just posted the array tutorial on my web site within the PDDP downloadable zip.
http://www.davesabine.com/media/puredata.asp?action=downloads
You can access it directly from the doc/5.reference/all_about_arrays.pd or I've included it as an abstraction in the tabread.pd and tabwrite.pd. (I plan to also include in it in the other "tab___.pd" documents as I write them.
If you'd be so kind, I'd be more than happy to hear some criticisms or suggestions about this tutorial. There's a lot of info to cover and, although I've spent a couple of days thinking and writing, I'm certain that I missed something --or perhaps there are better ways to cover the material that I included.
Regards, Dave S
-----Original Message----- From: guenter geiger [mailto:geiger@xdv.org] Sent: April 29, 2003 2:42 AM To: David Sabine Cc: pd-dev@iem.kug.ac.at Subject: Re: [PD-dev] [arraysize] in PD
Is this array tutorial already available ? I can at least include arraysize in the CVS version if it is really necessary, for the main distribution Miller has to decide.
Guenter
HI all,
I still have yet to do an important piece of homework, which is to see how arraysize (and a bunch of others) appear in Max/MSP so that I can at least try to stop introducing incompatibilities... I think 'arraysize' sounds pretty canonical and should eventually go in my version (as should about a dozen others like abs, etc.)
cheers Miller
On Tue, Apr 29, 2003 at 03:18:34AM -0600, David Sabine wrote:
Hello Guenter,
Yes, I've just posted the array tutorial on my web site within the PDDP downloadable zip.
http://www.davesabine.com/media/puredata.asp?action=downloads
You can access it directly from the doc/5.reference/all_about_arrays.pd or I've included it as an abstraction in the tabread.pd and tabwrite.pd. (I plan to also include in it in the other "tab___.pd" documents as I write them.
If you'd be so kind, I'd be more than happy to hear some criticisms or suggestions about this tutorial. There's a lot of info to cover and, although I've spent a couple of days thinking and writing, I'm certain that I missed something --or perhaps there are better ways to cover the material that I included.
Regards, Dave S
-----Original Message----- From: guenter geiger [mailto:geiger@xdv.org] Sent: April 29, 2003 2:42 AM To: David Sabine Cc: pd-dev@iem.kug.ac.at Subject: Re: [PD-dev] [arraysize] in PD
Is this array tutorial already available ? I can at least include arraysize in the CVS version if it is really necessary, for the main distribution Miller has to decide.
Guenter
PD-dev mailing list PD-dev@iem.kug.ac.at http://iem.kug.ac.at/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pd-dev
hi Miller,
Miller Puckette wrote: ...
try to stop introducing incompatibilities... I think 'arraysize' sounds pretty canonical
nay... there is not even such thing as array in max/msp...
Buffer~ is quite a different beast. It is usually inspected with info~, but still, there is no size in info~'s output, just the length in ms.
[...] and should eventually go in my version (as should about a dozen others like abs, etc.)
well... hope, at least, that you do not forget about cyclone in the process...
Krzysztof
short answer: go crazy.
long answer: generally the merging of externals into pd causes annoying situations when the externals develop at a different rate to pd (eg, iemlib in the early days - emphasised by needed parallel patches to pd's tk code).
byt arraysize is pretty small, it has atleast a snowballs chance of being bug free.
pix.
On Tue, 29 Apr 2003 10:41:37 +0200 (CEST) guenter geiger geiger@xdv.org wrote:
Is this array tutorial already available ? I can at least include arraysize in the CVS version if it is really necessary, for the main distribution Miller has to decide.
Guenter
On Mon, 28 Apr 2003, David Sabine wrote:
Hello all,
I'd like to make a motion that [arraysize] (by Pix) be included in the main PD distribution and be considered for inclusion as a "native PD object".
My reasons:
- PD lacks this tool and although it is available as an external, I
feel that this functionality is essential and should be "internal".
- PD object names like [getsize] and [setsize] are
misleading...particularly when those reference files refer to "the size of an array". Obviously this matter would be clarified if users were presented with [arraysize] also - I'm guessing that PD users would clearly understand the different applications for these 'related' objects.
- I have just finished writing an abstraction entitled
"all_about_arrays" for PDDP which will be included as a supplement to the PDDP reference files regarding [tabread], [tabwrite], [tabsend~], [tabwhatever] etc. To demonstrate some of the "usefulness" of arrays (i.e. wave editing, concatenating two arrays, slicing and splicing arrays, joining arrays, reversing an array, etc.) I have found it necessary to use [arraysize] and I would prefer that users not have to download and install an external object just to understand these tutorials. Particularly when determining the length of an array is such a standard procedure in high level programming environments.
If anybody has any objections, I'd like to discuss this matter. Otherwise, should Miller make a decision on this?
I don't know how Pix feels about this, as I have never discussed it with him.
If all developers vote "no", then what is the best method for PDDP to include [arraysize] in the reference files? Should I link to the CVS? Should I keep an updated arraysize.dll in the downloadable zip? Should I assume that most users would have the foresight to have already downloaded arraysize.dll?
Regards, Dave Sabine
PD-dev mailing list PD-dev@iem.kug.ac.at http://iem.kug.ac.at/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pd-dev
PD-dev mailing list PD-dev@iem.kug.ac.at http://iem.kug.ac.at/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pd-dev
hi Guenter, Miller, and all,
my vote goes for adding 'getsize <array-name>' message to soundfiler. The soundfiler outlet is used already just for that -- reporting array size. No need for a new object.
Krzysztof
guenter geiger wrote: ...
I can at least include arraysize in the CVS version if it is really necessary, for the main distribution Miller has to decide.
or, even better, two messages: 'arraysize <array-name>', and 'filesize <file-name>' (in frames)...
etc, ad infinitum, I know...
Krzysztof
Krzysztof Czaja wrote: ...
my vote goes for adding 'getsize <array-name>' message to soundfiler. The soundfiler outlet is used already just for that -- reporting array size. No need for a new object.
On Tue, 29 Apr 2003, Krzysztof Czaja wrote:
hi Guenter, Miller, and all,
my vote goes for adding 'getsize <array-name>' message to soundfiler. The soundfiler outlet is used already just for that -- reporting array size. No need for a new object.
Yes, thats why I wanted to take a look at the implementation. In normal conditions the arraysize should be known. ... just add a [float] to store it should be enough. But you never know, there might be some situations
Guenter
Krzysztof
guenter geiger wrote: ...
I can at least include arraysize in the CVS version if it is really necessary, for the main distribution Miller has to decide.
i think it's not so much a matter of arraysize being strictly _necessary_, it's just that when you are throwing these floats around to keep track of the array size yourself, it seems a little silly because you know that this information is readily available inside pd. pd isn't doing any extra work to keep track of the information arraysize is giving out, it's just sitting there, without a decent interface to access it from patch-space.
on the otherhand, people should probably get out of the habit of resizing arrays liberally, since it's a time consuming thing to do during performance ;)
pix.
On Tue, 29 Apr 2003 13:09:20 +0200 (CEST) guenter geiger geiger@xdv.org wrote:
On Tue, 29 Apr 2003, Krzysztof Czaja wrote:
hi Guenter, Miller, and all,
my vote goes for adding 'getsize <array-name>' message to soundfiler. The soundfiler outlet is used already just for that -- reporting array size. No need for a new object.
Yes, thats why I wanted to take a look at the implementation. In normal conditions the arraysize should be known. ... just add a [float] to store it should be enough. But you never know, there might be some situations
Guenter
Krzysztof
guenter geiger wrote: ...
I can at least include arraysize in the CVS version if it is really necessary, for the main distribution Miller has to decide.
PD-dev mailing list PD-dev@iem.kug.ac.at http://iem.kug.ac.at/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pd-dev
-
David Sabine -
guenter geiger -
Krzysztof Czaja -
Miller Puckette -
pix