hi miller, list
don't knpow about other PD-users, but i find the new behaviour of cords not getting erased when clicked onto them quite annoying. since pd 0.36 has the very fine "undo" feature, i.m.o. there's no point in this extra security feature, it just steals time adn nerves.
how about the rest of you ?
ciao
oliver
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////// \\\\\\\ http://klingt.org/ground/lift \\\\\\ ///////// http://klingt.org/executive-ensemble ///////// \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
heya
I like it a lot, especially since I use both MAX and PD its nice that the behavior is the same. I would not think replying on the undo feature is a way to drive interface decisions.
ben
On Friday, February 21, 2003, at 11:53 AM, oliver wrote:
hi miller, list
don't knpow about other PD-users, but i find the new behaviour of cords not getting erased when clicked onto them quite annoying. since pd 0.36 has the very fine "undo" feature, i.m.o. there's no point in this extra security feature, it just steals time adn nerves.
how about the rest of you ?
ciao
oliver
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////// \\\\\\\ http://klingt.org/ground/lift \\\\\\ ///////// http://klingt.org/executive-ensemble ///////// \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
PD-list mailing list PD-list@iem.kug.ac.at http://iem.kug.ac.at/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pd-list
ok, now don't laugh... but does anyone know if there's a BASIC plugin for PD? specifically anything close to QuickBASIC v4.5?
THANKS! STEVE
On Fri, 21 Feb 2003, Stephen Martin wrote:
ok, now don't laugh...
MWAHAH! (oh sorry)
not that I'm aware of, BUT: if you are looking for a way to script for PD, there is two things you should look at:
1 - Larry Troxler's Scheme (SIOD) object.
2 - Thomas Grill's py/pyext object.
you can find both through the list archives or Google. Type 'py/pyext' or 'larry troxler scheme', which takes you to related PD_list messages.
Former is kinda limited because of SIOD, but it -works-, and Scheme can be a fruitful and easy language to learn. The latter is, well, the WHOLE of Python available to you within PD. This means you can build objects through a PD script, float, int or bang. It is thread-capable! Python is a -very- easy language to tackle, and very rewarding.
d
david casal --0+
d.casal@uea.ac.uk --9+
ecdc.dyndns.org/dc --)+
Also, I can't find it now, but Guenter Geiger get pforth running in Pd a few years ago...
cheers Miller
On Sat, Feb 22, 2003 at 01:10:56PM +0000, david casal wrote:
On Fri, 21 Feb 2003, Stephen Martin wrote:
ok, now don't laugh...
MWAHAH! (oh sorry)
not that I'm aware of, BUT: if you are looking for a way to script for PD, there is two things you should look at:
1 - Larry Troxler's Scheme (SIOD) object.
2 - Thomas Grill's py/pyext object.
you can find both through the list archives or Google. Type 'py/pyext' or 'larry troxler scheme', which takes you to related PD_list messages.
Former is kinda limited because of SIOD, but it -works-, and Scheme can be a fruitful and easy language to learn. The latter is, well, the WHOLE of Python available to you within PD. This means you can build objects through a PD script, float, int or bang. It is thread-capable! Python is a -very- easy language to tackle, and very rewarding.
d
david casal --0+
d.casal@uea.ac.uk --9+
ecdc.dyndns.org/dc --)+
PD-list mailing list PD-list@iem.kug.ac.at http://iem.kug.ac.at/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pd-list
On Sat, 22 Feb 2003, Miller Puckette wrote:
Also, I can't find it now, but Guenter Geiger get pforth running in Pd a few years ago...
hmm, this is a more or less abandoned project. I was using gforth at the beginning, but this was not portable, then the atlast system.
I still have the atlast forth implementation lying around somewhere, but it is definitely not in a releaseable state.
Guenter
cheers Miller
On Sat, Feb 22, 2003 at 01:10:56PM +0000, david casal wrote:
On Fri, 21 Feb 2003, Stephen Martin wrote:
ok, now don't laugh...
MWAHAH! (oh sorry)
not that I'm aware of, BUT: if you are looking for a way to script for PD, there is two things you should look at:
1 - Larry Troxler's Scheme (SIOD) object.
2 - Thomas Grill's py/pyext object.
you can find both through the list archives or Google. Type 'py/pyext' or 'larry troxler scheme', which takes you to related PD_list messages.
Former is kinda limited because of SIOD, but it -works-, and Scheme can be a fruitful and easy language to learn. The latter is, well, the WHOLE of Python available to you within PD. This means you can build objects through a PD script, float, int or bang. It is thread-capable! Python is a -very- easy language to tackle, and very rewarding.
d
david casal --0+
d.casal@uea.ac.uk --9+
ecdc.dyndns.org/dc --)+
PD-list mailing list PD-list@iem.kug.ac.at http://iem.kug.ac.at/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pd-list
PD-list mailing list PD-list@iem.kug.ac.at http://iem.kug.ac.at/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pd-list
On Friday 21 February 2003 16:41, Stephen Martin wrote:
ok, now don't laugh...
<not gonna laugh, not gonna laugh ...?
but does anyone know if there's a BASIC plugin for PD? specifically anything close to QuickBASIC v4.5?
This is a really commonly requested feature, which I'd like to tackle as soon as my work on the COBOL plug in is done :-)
BTW I'm just being (or trying to be) funny here - I actually think there is nothing intrinsically wrong with seeking to use BASIC - for small, personal use work, which is what the typical user of PD what want such a plugin for, it makes sense to use a language which is easy to learn and use.
Larry
On Sat, 22 Feb 2003, Larry Troxler wrote:
This is a really commonly requested feature, which I'd like to tackle as soon as my work on the COBOL plug in is done :-)
COBOL?!?! Wow.
I am putting together a few pages a documentation on PD scripting (your Scheme object, Grill's py/pyext), geared towards people new to the options available in PD for scripting and how to get started.
Could you tell more?
d
david casal --0+
d.casal@uea.ac.uk --9+
ecdc.dyndns.org/dc --)+
as soon as my work on the COBOL plug in is done :-)
COBOL?!?! Wow.
Excellent!
I worked on a project a few years ago designing and building a java/web front end to a whole load of COBOL for a big pensions company. I had to learn enough COBOL to figure out what the code was doing - no docs because some of this code had been in active service for 20 years being modified and patched over time. Mental.
COBOL is a mighty strange language it looks like (in pseudo code terms):
move value to memory location
multiply memory location by value
calculate tax returns
add memory locations together
this is a slight exageration but not much - its like machine language with stratosphericly high level operations built in.
Its also really hard to get your head round if you are used to programing modern languages. Scary stuff.
cheers
mark
Hallo, david casal hat gesagt: // david casal wrote:
I am putting together a few pages a documentation on PD scripting (your Scheme object, Grill's py/pyext), geared towards people new to the options available in PD for scripting and how to get started.
Could you tell more?
"shell" in ggee (not on W32, I guess). Be *very* cardful with "shell" and move the external to a secureed directory, if you run pd suid root. Actually I now almost hanged my system when trying to run bwbasic through "shell" ;)
ciao
Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org__
On Sat, 22 Feb 2003, Frank Barknecht wrote:
"shell" in ggee (not on W32, I guess). Be *very* cardful with "shell" and move the external to a secureed directory, if you run pd suid root. Actually I now almost hanged my system when trying to run bwbasic through "shell" ;)
ah yes. thank you, will try documenting that.
d
david casal --0+
d.casal@uea.ac.uk --9+
ecdc.dyndns.org/dc --)+
On Sun, 23 Feb 2003, david casal wrote:
On Sat, 22 Feb 2003, Frank Barknecht wrote:
"shell" in ggee (not on W32, I guess). Be *very* cardful with "shell" and move the external to a secureed directory, if you run pd suid root. Actually I now almost hanged my system when trying to run bwbasic through "shell" ;)
ah yes. thank you, will try documenting that.
ah yes, thank you, I will try to fix that ... I think I should downgrade the priorities for the shell thread. In general, I think shell can be very general, and you can load every scripting language and comunicate through stdin/stdout.-
Ok, course it is experimental, but with feedback from ppl who use it it can improve....
Greetings,
Guenter
On Saturday 22 February 2003 15:08, david casal wrote:
On Sat, 22 Feb 2003, Larry Troxler wrote:
This is a really commonly requested feature, which I'd like to tackle as soon as my work on the COBOL plug in is done :-)
COBOL?!?! Wow.
Hey! I wasn't being serious there!
I am putting together a few pages a documentation on PD scripting (your Scheme object, Grill's py/pyext), geared towards people new to the options available in PD for scripting and how to get started.
About the scheme object: some time ago I asked on this list if anyone was using it, and the consensus was that it wasn't worth the effort for me to maintain (the version I'm using has some stuff that I haven't posted yet).
If this was wrong, and anybody finds pdscheme usefull, please let me know and I'll update the code and documentation.
If I find the time, I think it would be more usefull to implement something using Guile instead of SIOD. The advantage of SIOD was that it's really small, and was really easy to integrate, but it's not a standard Scheme. A bonus with Guile would be that Common Music ( http://ccrma-www.stanford.edu/software/cm/doc/cm.html ) runs on it.
A different approach would be to some PD infrastructure to interface to a Common Lisp implementation through a socket (where you could also run Common Music).
The two approaches have their advantages and disadvantages. I'll save enumerating them for another message. I'd really like to hear which of these approaches (or a third) PD lisper's think would be most worth the effort.
Larry Troxler
On Sat, 22 Feb 2003, Larry Troxler wrote:
Hey! I wasn't being serious there!
Oh. ;)
About the scheme object: some time ago I asked on this list if anyone was using it, and the consensus was that it wasn't worth the effort for me to maintain (the version I'm using has some stuff that I haven't posted yet). If this was wrong, and anybody finds pdscheme usefull, please let me know and I'll update the code and documentation.
I missed that post (or forgot to reply), but I've been working away trying Python in py/pyext. pdscheme was great, it was just SIOD limitations that kept me away after a while.
If I find the time, I think it would be more usefull to implement something using Guile instead of SIOD. The advantage of SIOD was that it's really small, and was really easy to integrate, but it's not a standard Scheme. A bonus with Guile would be that Common Music ( http://ccrma-www.stanford.edu/software/cm/doc/cm.html ) runs on it.
Yes please! +1 from me on this approach.
d
david casal --0+
d.casal@uea.ac.uk --9+
ecdc.dyndns.org/dc --)+
i also like it... it took a week or so to "learn" the new behavior, but i find it more safe. before it was often a lottery to click at the right cord. sme.
----- Original Message ----- From: "oliver" oliver@klingt.org To: "pd-liste" pd-list@iem.kug.ac.at Sent: Friday, February 21, 2003 5:53 PM Subject: [PD] cords in pd 0.36
hi miller, list
don't knpow about other PD-users, but i find the new behaviour of cords
not getting erased when clicked onto them quite
annoying. since pd 0.36 has the very fine "undo" feature, i.m.o. there's
no point in this extra security feature, it just steals time adn
nerves.
how about the rest of you ?
ciao
oliver
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////// \\\\\\\ http://klingt.org/ground/lift \\\\\\ ///////// http://klingt.org/executive-ensemble ///////// \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
PD-list mailing list PD-list@iem.kug.ac.at http://iem.kug.ac.at/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pd-list
Although I prefer it the old way, it would be nice to have a both options available, a toggle between the two? [Edit]--->[Cord Delete On/Off]?
Can't be difficult, who wants a go? I would, but I don't have MSVC++ on my machine!
--- marius schebella marius.schebella@chello.at wrote: > i also like it... it took a week or so to "learn"
the new behavior, but i find it more safe. before it was often a lottery to click at the right cord. sme.
----- Original Message ----- From: "oliver" oliver@klingt.org To: "pd-liste" pd-list@iem.kug.ac.at Sent: Friday, February 21, 2003 5:53 PM Subject: [PD] cords in pd 0.36
hi miller, list
don't knpow about other PD-users, but i find the
new behaviour of cords not getting erased when clicked onto them quite
annoying. since pd 0.36 has the very fine "undo"
feature, i.m.o. there's no point in this extra security feature, it just steals time adn
nerves.
how about the rest of you ?
ciao
oliver
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
\\\\\\\ http://klingt.org/ground/lift
\\\\\\
///////// http://klingt.org/executive-ensemble
/////////
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
PD-list mailing list PD-list@iem.kug.ac.at
http://iem.kug.ac.at/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pd-list
PD-list mailing list PD-list@iem.kug.ac.at
http://iem.kug.ac.at/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pd-list
Do You Yahoo!? Everything you'll ever need on one web page from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts http://uk.my.yahoo.com
Hallo, marius schebella hat gesagt: // marius schebella wrote:
i also like it... it took a week or so to "learn" the new behavior, but i find it more safe. before it was often a lottery to click at the right cord.
I would like it, if I could select a cord like any other objects, i.e. going over it with a pressed mouse. I sometimes find it hard to hit the small cords, especially on a laptop with touchpad.
ciao
Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org__
At first I felt like Oliver, especially with a laptop touchpad.
But then I got over it.
But I agree with Frank, the ability to marquee or block-select
cords would be great. I hate having to click on cords individually when there's a mess of them.
At 09:00 PM 21/02/2003 +0100, Frank Barknecht wrote:
Hallo, marius schebella hat gesagt: // marius schebella wrote:
i also like it... it took a week or so to "learn" the new behavior, but i find it more safe. before it was often a lottery to click at the right
cord.
I would like it, if I could select a cord like any other objects, i.e. going over it with a pressed mouse. I sometimes find it hard to hit the small cords, especially on a laptop with touchpad.
ciao
. . David McCallum . Music wants to be free . http://mentalfloss.ca/sintheta/ .
oliver wrote:
hi miller, list
don't knpow about other PD-users, but i find the new behaviour of cords not getting erased when clicked onto them quite annoying. since pd 0.36 has the very fine "undo" feature, i.m.o. there's no point in this extra security feature, it just steals time adn nerves.
how about the rest of you ?
i like the new behaviour much better. i deleted cords way to often by accident with 0.35.
-
bbogart -
david casal -
David McCallum -
Frank Barknecht -
guenter geiger -
Larry Troxler -
marius schebella -
mark -
Miller Puckette -
oliver -
Rory Walsh -
smoerk -
Stephen Martin