More generally, it would be great if abstractions could do anything a compiled object could do.
Exactly ;)
And again, let me add, there are things like the heavy compiler, https://enzienaudio.com where you can compile pd patches into optimized code
how does that work? Wouldn't that be something like the "gen~" idea I brought up? How hard would it be to have a compiler for a patch to be turned into a coded object?
if abstractions could do anything a compiled object could do including being optimized and efficient, that would be amazing...
cheers
2016-11-01 13:56 GMT-02:00 Alex Norman x37v.alex@gmail.com:
Miller did seem open to a control outlet on the inlet~ object. This was when we were discussing the clone object and how you have to pass messages to the first control inlet, if you have one, instead of just the first inlet always, to control the cloning operations. More generally, it would be great if abstractions could do anything a compiled object could do. Alex
On November 1, 2016 8:47:11 AM PDT, Alexandre Torres Porres < porres@gmail.com> wrote:
2016-11-01 8:42 GMT-02:00 Pierre Guillot guillotpierre6@gmail.com:
Hi Alexandre,
I wonder if a thing like libpd could work as turning a vanilla patch
into a
compiled object to be used inside pd... that'd be something like gen~
in
max/msp.
Can you be more specific ? For the moment, I think it would be equivalent to use an abstraction or the object [pd~] (libpd loads dynamically a patch so I guess that the execution of the patch cannot be optimized and except if the patch has been be somehow included inside the binary, you'll have to share the patch with the object). For me, the main advantage of gen~ is that it generates code that can be used inside an application but libpd already offers this feature. So what would be the advantage?
Well, I thought the code could be optimized somehow, which I believe is something gen~ does, and that could be an advantage... but I really know nothing and now it seems that is not possible.
A - being able to retrieve control data from [inlet~]
I did it in the Cicm Wrapper but it was pretty tricky. If you use the object [hoa.process~], you can send messages via a signal inlet for example. I'm not very proud of this because I had to hack a bit the inlet class. Now, I don't know if I must remove this feature or keep it... Perhaps somebody could tell/remind us if there is a reason why signal inlets can't receive messages.
cool, there's also a [route~] object from zexy which could be embedded in inlet~
B - being able to know if a signal is connected to [inlet~]
I also did it in the Cicm Wrapper, perhaps this feature could be included in the "m_pd.h" interface because for the moment you need to include "g_canvas.h" and "m_imp.h". Anyway, if you want a simple code that shows how to do it, I have an example https://github.com/pierreguillot/pd-dummy/blob/master/src/connected_tilde.c in my dummy library.
awesome, it's be great to have something like this in vanilla in order to improve the design of abstractions ;)
cheers
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list