I just had the same thought. It seems to me that Pd's OSC objects could be implemented so that they just do the protocol, then we'd have separate network objects that handle all of the networking. It would be a much more flexible system, and there would be less overlap in code to maintain (i.e., you would only have network code in the network obects, and OSC code in the OSC objects)
.hc
B. Bogart wrote:
Hey,
Can [netclient] be used to replace sendOSC and dumpOSC and then use only routeOSC for the routing?
I've not had a need for full duplex OSC yet...
b.
c wrote:
actually I just figured out that it wouldn't work, as the dumpOSC object can't listen on the port that's being used by sendOSC.
OSCx is half duplex. if you are unsatisfied with using seperate ports to send and recieve , you could look into enabling liblo in pd via Flext, or some of the OSC reflectors/managers like OSCgroups and a couple others whose name i can't recall..
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list