So i did browse though all the help files again to see if I could find anything else, here it is:
[%], [mod] and [div] call the otherbinops-help file, but none of these 3 objects are mentioned in it, so please update this help file to include them.
both delwrite~ and delread~ could be update to refer to the new vd~ name delread4~ (I had suggested this before with delread~ but forgot about delwrite~).
[value] could be update to inform that you can both read and write values to it from the [expr] family of objects
Moreover, many help files were hurting the eye because comments were overlaping with objects, the window size was wring and things like that. I assume some font size and things like that changed from one version to another and things got a little screwed up (30 of them exactly).
I made changes myself, all very minute and just to correct this aesthetic and reading problems - some incredibly minute, while other needed more effort separating overlapping things. But anyway, none should configure an "update to 0.47" remark in my oppinion... cause it's all the same!
only thing I really changed was in [change] (haha) - where I fixed a typo (STREAM instead of STEAM), find them all attached.
cheers
Hello,
[makefilename] N-Tuple substitution example :)
m
On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 10:24 PM, Alexandre Torres Porres porres@gmail.com wrote:
So i did browse though all the help files again to see if I could find anything else, here it is:
[%], [mod] and [div] call the otherbinops-help file, but none of these 3 objects are mentioned in it, so please update this help file to include them.
both delwrite~ and delread~ could be update to refer to the new vd~ name delread4~ (I had suggested this before with delread~ but forgot about delwrite~).
[value] could be update to inform that you can both read and write values to it from the [expr] family of objects
Moreover, many help files were hurting the eye because comments were overlaping with objects, the window size was wring and things like that. I assume some font size and things like that changed from one version to another and things got a little screwed up (30 of them exactly).
I made changes myself, all very minute and just to correct this aesthetic and reading problems - some incredibly minute, while other needed more effort separating overlapping things. But anyway, none should configure an "update to 0.47" remark in my oppinion... cause it's all the same!
only thing I really changed was in [change] (haha) - where I fixed a typo (STREAM instead of STEAM), find them all attached.
cheers
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
howdy, I can see it in the sourceforge you updated the help files, cool.
but in the otherbinops-help.pd I still don't see the [%] object
cheers
2016-05-05 23:24 GMT-03:00 Alexandre Torres Porres porres@gmail.com:
So i did browse though all the help files again to see if I could find anything else, here it is:
[%], [mod] and [div] call the otherbinops-help file, but none of these 3 objects are mentioned in it, so please update this help file to include them.
both delwrite~ and delread~ could be update to refer to the new vd~ name delread4~ (I had suggested this before with delread~ but forgot about delwrite~).
[value] could be update to inform that you can both read and write values to it from the [expr] family of objects
Moreover, many help files were hurting the eye because comments were overlaping with objects, the window size was wring and things like that. I assume some font size and things like that changed from one version to another and things got a little screwed up (30 of them exactly).
I made changes myself, all very minute and just to correct this aesthetic and reading problems - some incredibly minute, while other needed more effort separating overlapping things. But anyway, none should configure an "update to 0.47" remark in my oppinion... cause it's all the same!
only thing I really changed was in [change] (haha) - where I fixed a typo (STREAM instead of STEAM), find them all attached.
cheers
I put in a sentence to scare users away from "%". Use "mod" instead :)
M On Sat, May 07, 2016 at 12:37:18PM -0300, Alexandre Torres Porres wrote:
howdy, I can see it in the sourceforge you updated the help files, cool.
but in the otherbinops-help.pd I still don't see the [%] object
cheers
2016-05-05 23:24 GMT-03:00 Alexandre Torres Porres porres@gmail.com:
So i did browse though all the help files again to see if I could find anything else, here it is:
[%], [mod] and [div] call the otherbinops-help file, but none of these 3 objects are mentioned in it, so please update this help file to include them.
both delwrite~ and delread~ could be update to refer to the new vd~ name delread4~ (I had suggested this before with delread~ but forgot about delwrite~).
[value] could be update to inform that you can both read and write values to it from the [expr] family of objects
Moreover, many help files were hurting the eye because comments were overlaping with objects, the window size was wring and things like that. I assume some font size and things like that changed from one version to another and things got a little screwed up (30 of them exactly).
I made changes myself, all very minute and just to correct this aesthetic and reading problems - some incredibly minute, while other needed more effort separating overlapping things. But anyway, none should configure an "update to 0.47" remark in my oppinion... cause it's all the same!
only thing I really changed was in [change] (haha) - where I fixed a typo (STREAM instead of STEAM), find them all attached.
cheers
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
2016-05-07 14:53 GMT-03:00 Miller Puckette msp@ucsd.edu:
I put in a sentence to scare users away from "%". Use "mod" instead :)
oh, but I can't see it, so you just did it now, right?
I know they differ for negative values input, never knew why the reason..
expr also has a "%" function that behaves in the same way as the [%] object, to make things more confusing, a "fmod" function in expr also behaves in the same was as "%", but for float arguments, and not like vanilla's [mod]
in max, [%~] (or [modulo~]) will behave the same way as "fmod" in expr, that is modulo for float arguments, which is also in agreement to pd vanilla's % - only that pd's is for ints.
With all that, what I mean to ask and say is that I can't see what's wrong with [%] - the odd one out seems to be [mod].
what do you say?
cheers
I _think_ (but am not sure) that "%" works differently on different CPU architectures.
cheers Miller
On Sat, May 07, 2016 at 06:27:33PM -0300, Alexandre Torres Porres wrote:
2016-05-07 14:53 GMT-03:00 Miller Puckette msp@ucsd.edu:
I put in a sentence to scare users away from "%". Use "mod" instead :)
oh, but I can't see it, so you just did it now, right?
I know they differ for negative values input, never knew why the reason..
expr also has a "%" function that behaves in the same way as the [%] object, to make things more confusing, a "fmod" function in expr also behaves in the same was as "%", but for float arguments, and not like vanilla's [mod]
in max, [%~] (or [modulo~]) will behave the same way as "fmod" in expr, that is modulo for float arguments, which is also in agreement to pd vanilla's % - only that pd's is for ints.
With all that, what I mean to ask and say is that I can't see what's wrong with [%] - the odd one out seems to be [mod].
what do you say?
cheers
% can be different with respect to sign in different implementations of C. fmod() in C is designed to work with floats.
On my system, -10 [mod 3] and -10 [% 3] in Pd work differently. [mod] outputs the positive remainder, which is 2, while % outputs the remainder with the sign of the dividend, which is -1.
[div] and [mod] form a pair. Given two numbers A and B, B*(A [div B])+(A [mod B]) = A. [%] and [/]—[int] should form a similar pair, so -10 [div 3] should yield -4, while int(-10 [/ 3]) should yield -3.
On Sat, May 7, 2016 at 6:44 PM, Miller Puckette msp@ucsd.edu wrote:
I _think_ (but am not sure) that "%" works differently on different CPU architectures.
cheers Miller
On Sat, May 07, 2016 at 06:27:33PM -0300, Alexandre Torres Porres wrote:
2016-05-07 14:53 GMT-03:00 Miller Puckette msp@ucsd.edu:
I put in a sentence to scare users away from "%". Use "mod" instead :)
oh, but I can't see it, so you just did it now, right?
I know they differ for negative values input, never knew why the reason..
expr also has a "%" function that behaves in the same way as the [%] object, to make things more confusing, a "fmod" function in expr also behaves in the same was as "%", but for float arguments, and not like vanilla's [mod]
in max, [%~] (or [modulo~]) will behave the same way as "fmod" in expr, that is modulo for float arguments, which is also in agreement to pd vanilla's % - only that pd's is for ints.
With all that, what I mean to ask and say is that I can't see what's
wrong
with [%] - the odd one out seems to be [mod].
what do you say?
cheers
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
-
Alexandre Torres Porres -
Matt Barber -
me.grimm -
Miller Puckette