Thanks for the replies.
Two additional remarks: Personally I find it easier to always make int counters, then modify those as needed. The practical reason is, that then you can use [mod] which is great for wrapping counters.
Interesting, I have not thought about that before, I will give it a try sometime.
Second: It took me a while, probably years, to realize, that it will solve almost any problem with counting, if you do *not* conenct the main [f] outlet directly to the [+ 1], but instead put the [mod] in between those two like the right counter in attached patch. It's a simple change, but in most cases it is the Right Thing to do instead of fiddling with [sel] and relatives.
I also sometimes use [mod], but did not use here because of the float I was using. In fact, whenever I had to to integer counting, I use [mod] most of the time now. I can't remember where I saw it first though.
As to Countability, sounds interesting and I know nothing about;) will google it when I have some time later.
Cheers
CHUN
I have a strange rather annoying problem with Pd 0.38 test 7. I recently displayed a patch I am working on with a video projector to show a class and now that I am at home with no secondary monitor for my laptop the patch is still out of the screen(being displayed on an imaginery projector!) How do I get it back without having to reconnet my laptop to another monitor and set up dual display? Any ideas? I can't see any of the patch but it shows up as open on the taskbar, I'm running WinXP. Cheers, Rory.
Win a castle for NYE with your mates and Yahoo! Messenger http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
Cheers, that was driving me crazy! I never thought of the good old cursor keys!
Rory.
--- Peter Todd peter_todd82@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
set up dual display? Any ideas? I can't see any of
the
patch but it shows up as open on the taskbar, I'm running WinXP. Cheers, Rory.
Right click on the icon on the taskbar, select 'move', then press a cursor key.
___________________________________________________________ Win a castle for NYE with your mates and Yahoo! Messenger http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
I have a patch that writes 4 piece of audio to 4 different arrays, each of the samples are 5 seconds long, so each of the arrays are over 200,000 points long. It seems to cause quite a lag in performace, any pointers? I did not think that filling 4 5 second audio buffers would cause this kind of problem? I am running XP and have only 256 RAM, but surely 256 RAM is enough for 20 seconds? Or is it?
thanks in advance, Rory.
PS I am also using quite a few of the GUI objects, could this be adding to the problem?
Win a castle for NYE with your mates and Yahoo! Messenger http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
On Wed, Dec 08, 2004 at 07:29:35PM +0000, Rory Walsh wrote:
I have a patch that writes 4 piece of audio to 4 different arrays, each of the samples are 5 seconds long, so each of the arrays are over 200,000 points long. It seems to cause quite a lag in performace, any pointers? I did not think that filling 4 5 second audio buffers would cause this kind of problem? I am running XP and have only 256 RAM, but surely 256 RAM is enough for 20 seconds? Or is it?
thanks in advance, Rory.
PS I am also using quite a few of the GUI objects,
are the arrays visible on the screen as theyre being written to? might want to use "table" instead..
could this be adding to the problem?
___________________________________________________________ Win a castle for NYE with your mates and Yahoo! Messenger http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://iem.at/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pd-list
Hallo, ix hat gesagt: // ix wrote:
are the arrays visible on the screen as theyre being written to? might want to use "table" instead..
BTW: It has been a long time since I last created an array object, I always use [table] if alone, because I can just create it like any other object by typing "table $0-x" into an object box...
Well, this isn't really relevant, sorry.
Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org__