Exactly. You'd essentially write the same patch twice-- once completely in Max, and if it gets accepted then with Pd and wrap it in a [pd~] object.
OR:
In fact you could just work with the subset of objects that are exactly the same between the two environments: [cos~] [phasor~] [biquad~] and so on.
Then just make sure you don't have whitespace inside [expr] or [expr~], and you could really just write the whole thing once in Pd, submit it as a Max patch, and perform it as a Pd patch.
That would be the most effective way to show the idiocy of the way the call was written.
-Jonathan
From: Richie Cyngler glitchpop@gmail.com To: Mathieu Bouchard matju@artengine.ca Cc: Jonathan Wilkes jancsika@yahoo.com; servando barreiro servandisco@yahoo.es; Miller Puckette msp@ucsd.edu; "pd-list@iem.at" pd-list@iem.at Sent: Tuesday, January 3, 2012 5:55 PM Subject: Re: [PD] no pd??
I don't think you're follow the intention. The intention of using [pd~] in Max would be to subvert the intentions of the organisers, because their policy is exclusive for no apparent reason. At least that is my take on it.
On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 9:30 AM, Mathieu Bouchard matju@artengine.ca wrote:
Le 2012-01-03 à 13:05:00, Jonathan Wilkes a écrit :
Ha! I forgot that [pd~] works in Max.
That would be _really_ funny if a Pd'er snuck into this like that!
Don't you think that the way the rules are stated, using [pd~] in MAX would also be forbidden ?
What's not clear in the following text ?
"The electronic processing must be developed and implemented using
Max/MSP or Kyma. (we will not accept patches developed in Pure Data or SuperCollider)."
______________________________________________________________________ | Mathieu BOUCHARD ----- téléphone : +1.514.383.3801 ----- Montréal, QC _______________________________________________ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
-- Richie