Hi Leandro
I may have a hint, though I don't have the time to test it myself. From 1 I found this:
<snip> OSC Bundles An OSC Bundle consists of the OSC-string "#bundle" followed by an OSC Time Tag, followed by zero or more OSC Bundle Elements. The OSC-timetag is a 64-bit fixed point time tag whose semantics are described below.
An OSC Bundle Element consists of its size and its contents. The size is an int32 representing the number of 8-bit bytes in the contents, and will always be a multiple of 4. The contents are either an OSC Message or an OSC Bundle.
</snip>
Now let's assume (again a bad hack, but it seems you have to deal with bad hacks at the moment) that the bundled messages coming from max actually contain only one bundle element. This would mean that all the bundle header stuff is at the beginning of the OSC message and also it has a fixed size which we are might able to exploit.
So let's calculate the size of the OSC bundle stuff that we like to get rid of:
#bundle - tag: 8 bytes timetag: 8 bytes size of bundle element: 4 bytes
The rest is assumed to be the plain OSC message. So, what you might want to try is to split off the first 20 (8+8+4) bytes of the raw OSC message in order to get a plain unbundled OSC message.
You can achieve that with a [list split 20] inserted right after the [udpreceive]. After that you prepend the '/' and after that you insert my OSC zero-padding abstraction.
Let us know, if that works.
Roman
On Wed, 2010-10-27 at 11:12 +0200, Leandro da Mota Damasceno wrote:
i got the impression it could be something like that. One easy way to translate it would be through max/msp itself, but then again i would have another patch running just to do a very simple task, and it doesn't sound very efficient. I do agree that translating is the best solution right now and that there must be some way to do it. I'm just not that proficient in PD to figure it out.
So, de-bundle + attach / as Roman said seems to be the best way. How do I do that?
Leandro
On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 10:37 AM, IOhannes m zmoelnig zmoelnig@iem.at wrote: On 2010-10-27 09:47, Leandro da Mota Damasceno wrote: > Hi Roman >
> It's ok, i just keep forgetting to reply to all... > > so, I really don't understand how that could be happening, especially when > in max/MSP i don't have to route any #bundle tag. It's funny how it shows > how different it is to work with osc in both languages. again: obviously max/msp has a somewhat non-standard interpretation of what OSC means. (please correct me if i'm wrong; but afaik the pd-implementation is rather "with the book" and supports everything that is "proper" (as in: standard) OSC) furthermore, max/msp obviously knows how to deal with its own interpretation of the standard, hence you don't have any problems on max/msp with what you think is OSC. if i tell you that "dös is a so" is english, you can either believe me and question your knowledge of english, or you don't believe me and question my definition of english. obviously some of the words look like english (and some even have the same meaning)...but it doesn't help you a lot in understanding what i said. it would be better if we agreed on which language we meant when we want to talk in this language. fgmsdr IOhannes PS: there is still hope to write a translator from what you get to what Pd thinks is OSC. it might be good to get your transmitted data (e.g in binary form)
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list