Hi list!
Thanks for your answers!
I think arraysize is the best way to obtain table size in my case. I know as IOhannes said that I can use the length output from soundfiler, but I load a lot of samples at the same time in the same soundfiler, so it's difficult to get each size separately. I have an abstraction which plays synchronized with a master tempo a drums loop, and it has as argument its table name. So I think the best way is to get the table size with [arraysize $1] or as Hans suggested [expr size("$s2")] for pd-vanilla.
Saludos!
2008/6/11 Hans Roels hans.roels@versateladsl.be:
Apart from [soundfiler] I use this trick to get the size of any array (audio or data) in pd vanilla: (array1 = the name of an example array)
bang | [expr size("array1")] | print
or replace the expr with [expr size("$s2")] and connect a message [symbol array1( to the second inlet of this expr object
hans r
At 09:38 11/06/2008, you wrote:
On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 10:03:28AM +0200, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
raul diaz wrote:
I have a dumb question. What's the best way to get the size of a
table?
Sometimes I load a lot of samples on tables with soundfiler and I
would
like to take the size of each sample as a variable in order to use it with phasor + tabread4~. Is there any object which gets the size of a table?
well i have a dumb answer: why not use the "length" output of
[soundfiler]?
i think that in this case the philosophy of Pd his, that there are 2 ways to change the length of a table: do it interactively (e.g. create
a
[table bla 1024] or do it programmatically (e.g. via [; bla resize
216()
in the first case the author of the software is responsible for using (e.g. "hardcoding") the right table-size throughout there patch, in the latter case you could just listen to these programmatical changes). tables suddenly changing there size are beyond Pd :-)
There is one situation I have encountered where it would be useful to have a built in [arraysize]. In some of the s-abstractions such as [s-samplepiece~] you have to pass in the table name that you'd like the abstraction to use. This means that at some point the user loads some audio data into the named table (for example using [s-loader~]) and they then know the sample table size. When they create the [s-samplepiece~] playback abstraction they must manually enter the array size as one of the arguments to the abstraction, along with the table name. Inefficient.
Best,
Chris.
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
On Wed, 2008-06-11 at 13:18 +0200, raul diaz wrote:
Hi list!
Thanks for your answers!
I think arraysize is the best way to obtain table size in my case. I know as IOhannes said that I can use the length output from soundfiler, but I load a lot of samples at the same time in the same soundfiler, so it's difficult to get each size separately.
this is certainly not true. pd's execution order is very strict, so it shouldn't cause any trouble at all to load several samples in 0 logical time through the same [soundfiler] while keeping track of all sample lengths. from pd's perspective, everything is processed sequentially, even if for the user it looks like to happen at the same time. so conceptually, there isn't actually no 'at the same time', so there is also no need to wait until all samples are loaded and then ask each array about its size.
roman
___________________________________________________________ Der frühe Vogel fängt den Wurm. Hier gelangen Sie zum neuen Yahoo! Mail: http://mail.yahoo.de
-
raul diaz -
Roman Haefeli