On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, Tim Blechmann wrote:

...

[wrap] from iemlib

[wrap] from maxlib

[wrap] from zexy (which i think is best ;-))

let me guess, all with a slightly different behaviour :(

yes, wrap from iemlib is a (0,1] mapping, while maxlib is [0,1). zexy is the best because it has the widest range [0,1] :)

Guenter

cheers ... tim

-- mailto:TimBlechmann@gmx.de ICQ: 96771783 http://www.mokabar.tk

After one look at this planet any visitor from outer space would say "I want to see the manager." William S. Burroughs

---

PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://iem.at/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pd-list

...

...

[wrap] from iemlib

[wrap] from maxlib

[wrap] from zexy (which i think is best ;-))

let me guess, all with a slightly different behaviour :(

yes, wrap from iemlib is a (0,1] mapping, while maxlib is [0,1). zexy is the best because it has the widest range [0,1] :)

argh ... never trust a software, you haven't written yourself ;-)

t

Miller Puckette wrote:

I believe wrap~ is [0,1) (it's supposed to be at least!) so the 'maxlib' wrap is the one you should use.

...

...

zexy is the best because it has the widest range [0,1] :)

which is not true.

zexy [wrap]s between [a, b) (where a defaults to 0.0 and b to 1.0)

off.end.ed (somehow i have to add the ;-) right in here...) IOhannes

guenter geiger wrote:

On Wed, 10 Nov 2004, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:

...

...

...

...

zexy is the best because it has the widest range [0,1] :)

which is not true.

sorry, it wasn't meant seriously. I trust that all three implement

well, never mind. i understood very well what you were pointing at (but of course felt the urge to get things right ;-))

I just comletely fail to understand the reasoning behind having three wrap externals. I would be glad if one of you three could explain it.

i guess it is the same as ever:

1. normally i only use zexy (because most things i ever need are in

there because they are in there because i need them) 2) this keeps me from having nameclashes on my machine: for instance i am using Gem a lot (no-na) but i don't want it in my .pdrc for testing purposes; using Gem+maxlib would result in the famous [scale]-problem which i am not very interested in (i mean: i am interested in the problem but not in having it) 3) thus i didn't know that the others existed. (even though it might seem strange that i did not realize that there was one in the iemlib) 4) i needed an object that not only wraps between [0,1) but between 2 arbitrary numbers, e.g. [-pi, pi).

now that i have learned of [maxlib/wrap] i see that it provides exactly this; the only problem i see with it is, that it defaults to wrap between [0, 0) which is not very convenient.

anyhow, i am thinking about restructuring zexy a lot, and i might drop [wrap] then (as i see, that mine is probably the youngest)

mfg.as.dr IOhannes

Then, for example, zexy.wrap would be a different object than iem.wrap,

and

there would not be any name clashes.

or zexy/wrap and iem/wrap as we recently agreed.... Anyone working on that issue already?

best greetings, Thomas

...

Then, for example, zexy.wrap would be a different object than iem.wrap,

and

...

there would not be any name clashes.

or zexy/wrap and iem/wrap as we recently agreed.... Anyone working on that issue already?

not yet ... but if you post a feature request on the tracker, someone can assign it to me ... (i hope i'll find some time for that, next week or so)

cheers ... tim

this is what i was referring too yestereve when saying to günther "i give up too; i have checked it it"

so it should be in the cvs right now

missed that, but read it in the cvs changelog ... although i haven't checked it, yet ... good job ...

t

Marc Boon wrote:

Johannes M Zmoelnig wrote:

...

2. this keeps me from having nameclashes on my machine: for instance i

am using Gem a lot (no-na) but i don't want it in my .pdrc for testing purposes; using Gem+maxlib would result in the famous [scale]-problem which i am not very interested in (i mean: i am interested in the problem but not in having it) 3) thus i didn't know that the others existed. (even though it might seem strange that i did not realize that there was one in the iemlib)

These two points clearly illustrate the need for namespaces in Pd. Like every other OO programming language, Pd would greatly benefit from namespaces, like <package>.<object>. Then, for example, zexy.wrap would be a different object than iem.wrap, and there would not be any name clashes.

Not only would this avoid nameclashes, but it would also help when I get a patch in the mail or from the archive, and it doesn't include docs as to which libs it is using. Even after I've compiled what appears to be all the externals, and have copies of what seems to be all the commonly-used abstractions, I still get unmade objects when trying out stuff I find on the web, and usually that means Googling around to see where to get the missing parts.

AFAIK, though, you *can* specify [maxlib_wrap] or [iem_wrap], because they actually *do* do different things, and have caused me much grief in the past ;-) This convention is not commonly used, however, except in the rare cases where people know there is a nameclash and intend to publish their patches.

How to implement this while keeping backwards compatibility with old patches will be the trick, here.

best, d.

guenter geiger wrote:

On Wed, 10 Nov 2004, Marc Boon wrote:

...

These two points clearly illustrate the need for namespaces in Pd.

I don't agree. I think the solution would be to have only one wrap.

i think that there is no possibility to acchieve this, as we can easily see if we have a look at the archives. this problem has been discussed for several years now. quoting Krzysztof:

...

So, I really do not know, if this is going to be a real step forward, or just a fuel keeping this thread alive for some more time?

this has been in august 2002 !! note the resignation on the length of the thread.

pd itself can easily be kept simple and orthogonal without nameclashes. i don't believe that externals/libraries can.

But I give up

me too.

i have checked it in

mfg.as.dr IOhannes