Lao Yu wrote:
For the sake of replying one rather angry reaction (I guess he won't
read)
whomever you are referring to here - it's very much likely that they will read your post.
you seem to be used to hostile mailinglists. even though i (personally) am often grumpy, i would not consider the Pd-list to be hostile in general.
- when incrementing a coarse / fine value of for instance
tuning it is totally irrelevant which parameter is changed first. the
this is not the point. the point is that if you do have control over execution via a hot/cold inlet model, you can very easily write all-hot objects that circumvent this. (as without doubt the numerous patches sent in this thread have demonstrated; i haven't had a look into them). on the other hand, it is impossible to build a hot/cold object if your system provides only all-hot objects.
point is to output a new value whenever either is changed. So
pointing out that the hot/cold logic is essential to pd's workings
doesn't even remotely give me a clue.
nobody said that hot/cold logic is essential to Pd's workings. what has been said is that understanding hot/cold logic is essential to work with Pd. since this was your problem, i don't know what other clue one could have given to you.
fgmasdr IOhannes