On Mon, 15 May 2006, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
On May 15, 2006, at 5:21 PM, Sciss wrote:
however changing the existing object is not a good idea, it will certainly be not backward compatible.
Yes, might be true. Thats why I asked how many people are using mod in order to do the operation and truncate the result. Personally I never used it that way.
man fmod:
DESCRIPTION The fmod() function computes the remainder of dividing x by y. The return value is x - n * y, where n is the quotient of x / y, rounded towards zero to an integer.
Günter
best, -sciss-
Am 15.05.2006 um 12:51 schrieb Hans-Christoph Steiner:
On Fri, 12 May 2006, geiger wrote:
On Thu, 11 May 2006, Frank Barknecht wrote:
[div] ... and [mod] in that case.
Some definitions of [mod] extend it to be able to use the real numbers as first parameter. So 2.45 mod 2 would be 0.45. I think this could be a good extension to Pd's mod object, and it should also be backwards compatible to its current behaviour. The change inside the code would be trivial. Question is how many patches depend on the truncation after the mod operation.
I think that [mod] should probably do whatever ANSI C or ISO math stuff does, which I think it currently is doing. Most programming languages follow these conventions, so its a good idea for Pd to as well.
But the object you propose does sound handy, so maybe it should be a separate object, like [floatmod].
.hc
If you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem. - Eldridge Cleaver
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list