On 2017-02-27 23:46, Lucas Cordiviola wrote:
Just because we are at it.
it's totally unrelated.
On w32 I can have long tables but I cant get values beyond 16777216 using [tabread].
Also a simple counter stops there, printing with [makefilename %d]:
in general i wouldn't use [makefilename] for such things (you are really not interested in the string representation of values, but instead of the values in their numeric representation).
e.g.
[1677726( | [t f f] | | [+ 1] | | | [- ] | [print]
print: symbol 16777213 print: symbol 16777214 print: symbol 16777215 print: symbol 16777216 print: symbol 16777216 print: symbol 16777216 print: symbol 16777216 print: symbol 16777216
Is this also happening on 64bit Pd/OS?
this is happening on all single precision builds of Pd. you need double precision to work around the problem.
while single precision indeed takes 32bit per number, and double precision takes 64bit, when we talk about a "64bit Pd/OS" we really mean something unrelated (the size of the pointers).
there has been extensive talk about this, including katjas double-precision Pd in 2007 and my recent attempts on getting double-precision Pd to fly, as presented on the PdCon16.
gamsdr IOhannes