Hi,
Is there anyone out there who could teach me how to make good looking stand alone pd apps, I mean pd patches with a nice looking GUI on top that would play on any computer even without pd installed. I saw this guy the other day with his max based lighting board stand alone app. and I thought it was pretty cool... Thanks!
D.S
http://www.flickr.com/photos/schafferdavid/ http://audioblog.arteradio.com/David_Schaffer/
Hotmail: Free, trusted and rich email service. https://signup.live.com/signup.aspx?id=60969
Well basically,in my opinion for the gui,you can just play woth the send and receive object,as well as creating sub patches. This will create a patch with less connection between objects,looks more tidy. Also some clever use of buttons (bang,toggle) and colored canvas could ease the eye on looking at the patch. based on my experience,these are the things that I focused on.
You might wanna look at excellent tutorials at http://www.obiwannabe.co.uk where topics such as creating GUI is also tackled.
As for the standalone apps,I know that it is possible to create such on Mac OS only. I never managed to successfully create one though,probably somebody here might succeed already.
Cheers,
Adityo
Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone from Sinyal Bagus XL, Nyambung Teruuusss...!
-----Original Message----- From: David Schaffer schafferdavid@hotmail.com Sender: pd-list-bounces@iem.at Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 20:48:30 To: pd listpd-list@iem.at Subject: [PD] interface/pd-based standalone applications question
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
On Tue, 29 Jun 2010, Mike Moser-Booth wrote:
I've always thought that what Max considers standalones is kind of shady. They're just the patch and Max Runtime bundled together. The only difference is that the patch(es) used are put together in a single file (which Max calls a collective, but anyone with Max can open on their own and edit) and that the Runtime automatically loads the patch.
What's the problem ? The difference is in the expectations. If you come from a QuickBASIC MSDOS background and were picking standalone over the version that used Brown42."EXE", the difference you were picking was in the bundling of precompiled code into a file that already was containing your own compiled code anyway. Thus the only difference was in the linking options : it didn't make the difference between compiling and not compiling, and in that sense, Max standalones don't have to make that difference, when the job is a job of bundling.
It more just gives the "impression" of a standalone executable.
It's a standalone executable. (what are you talking about ?)
it's really not much different than just running the patch normally.
That's what the GOAL is.
If there was another goal, you'd have a checkbox somewhere or a different dialogue that takes you through a different process, such as DRM, obfuscation, compilation/optimisation, or whatever else that is a means to reach the goal that you want to reach.
_ _ __ ___ _____ ________ _____________ _____________________ ... | Mathieu Bouchard, Montréal, Québec. téléphone: +1.514.383.3801
Processing (i don't like to type it with 55 =P but I know its the original...) is completly transparent to OS. It works normally with Linux, just grab it and launch it. Its java... so its JavaVM and OS-independent.
I have used processing with Pd, currently I'm using AS3 because its faster for me...(coding wise). Although I'd rather have this on p5 because its fully open.
On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 4:08 PM, Mathieu Bouchard matju@artengine.cawrote:
On Tue, 29 Jun 2010, Mike Moser-Booth wrote:
I've always thought that what Max considers standalones is kind of shady.
They're just the patch and Max Runtime bundled together. The only difference is that the patch(es) used are put together in a single file (which Max calls a collective, but anyone with Max can open on their own and edit) and that the Runtime automatically loads the patch.
What's the problem ? The difference is in the expectations. If you come from a QuickBASIC MSDOS background and were picking standalone over the version that used Brown42."EXE", the difference you were picking was in the bundling of precompiled code into a file that already was containing your own compiled code anyway. Thus the only difference was in the linking options : it didn't make the difference between compiling and not compiling, and in that sense, Max standalones don't have to make that difference, when the job is a job of bundling.
It more just gives the "impression" of a standalone executable.
It's a standalone executable. (what are you talking about ?)
it's really not much different than just running the patch normally.
That's what the GOAL is.
If there was another goal, you'd have a checkbox somewhere or a different dialogue that takes you through a different process, such as DRM, obfuscation, compilation/optimisation, or whatever else that is a means to reach the goal that you want to reach.
_ _ __ ___ _____ ________ _____________ _____________________ ... | Mathieu Bouchard, Montréal, Québec. téléphone: +1.514.383.3801 _______________________________________________ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 2:53 PM, Pedro Lopes pedro.lopes@ist.utl.pt wrote:
Processing (i don't like to type it with 55 =P but I know its the original...)
Actually, a few years ago the project has deliberately switched to the non-l33t spelling of the name of the project so "Proce55ing" and "Processing" are 2 different products. The latter is obsolete.
is completly transparent to OS. It works normally with Linux, just grab it and launch it. Its java... so its JavaVM and OS-independent.
I may be wrong but I believe that Processing will require Sun's Java in order to work correctly which is not installed be default with some Linux distributions.
./MiS
It requires a JavaVM of course (its..java) Wether your distro offers that or not, you can install it. Processing is JavaVM-dependent and not OS-dependent since java is available for almost everything.
:)
That was my point. I think I have used processing with other VMs (icedtea, openJDK, ...) but I can confirm that later this week.
On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 8:17 PM, Michal Seta mis@artengine.ca wrote:
On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 2:53 PM, Pedro Lopes pedro.lopes@ist.utl.pt wrote:
Processing (i don't like to type it with 55 =P but I know its the original...)
Actually, a few years ago the project has deliberately switched to the non-l33t spelling of the name of the project so "Proce55ing" and "Processing" are 2 different products. The latter is obsolete.
is completly transparent to OS. It works normally with Linux, just grab it and launch it. Its java... so its JavaVM and OS-independent.
I may be wrong but I believe that Processing will require Sun's Java in order to work correctly which is not installed be default with some Linux distributions.
./MiS
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 10:44 PM, Mike Moser-Booth mmoserbooth@gmail.com wrote:
I've always thought that what Max considers standalones is kind of shady. They're just the patch and Max Runtime bundled together.
There are 2 ways of distributing patches to those who do not own Max (or in order to make it more difficult to reverse-engineer the code):
- collective: a bundle of patches which can in turn be distributed as
a file and requires the Max runtime to run (whether an end-user can actually distribute Max Runtime is a different question, I never looked into the legal side of this)
- Standalone executable. In which case the collective is actually
embedded into the executable (minus any media such as audio files etc,).
The only difference is that the patch(es) used are put together in a single file (which Max calls a collective, but anyone with Max can open on their own and edit)
No. Once the patch has been turned into the collective, another user will not be able to simply open and edit away (but it is possible if one has the right tools and knowledge of the file format but then that falls into the category of reverse-engineering).
it's nice because it makes the patches easier to distribute to people who don't own Max, but it's really not much different than just running the patch normally.
I think it is possible to prepare an installer, for any platform, that contains Pd and all the necessary externals etc. that will automatically load everything that it needs in order to do its thing. Each platform will have to deal with this in different way but often a simple shell script will take care of everything. This way you can distribute a "standalone" version of whatever program you have done.
./MiS
I think this whole thing just does not sound like free (as in freedom) software anyway. I don´t understand why max patchers always want to hide their code. I think PD programmers should try to make their code as redable as possible.
2010/6/30 Michal Seta mis@artengine.ca:
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 10:44 PM, Mike Moser-Booth mmoserbooth@gmail.com wrote:
I've always thought that what Max considers standalones is kind of shady. They're just the patch and Max Runtime bundled together.
There are 2 ways of distributing patches to those who do not own Max (or in order to make it more difficult to reverse-engineer the code):
- collective: a bundle of patches which can in turn be distributed as
a file and requires the Max runtime to run (whether an end-user can actually distribute Max Runtime is a different question, I never looked into the legal side of this)
- Standalone executable. In which case the collective is actually
embedded into the executable (minus any media such as audio files etc,).
The only difference is that the patch(es) used are put together in a single file (which Max calls a collective, but anyone with Max can open on their own and edit)
No. Once the patch has been turned into the collective, another user will not be able to simply open and edit away (but it is possible if one has the right tools and knowledge of the file format but then that falls into the category of reverse-engineering).
it's nice because it makes the patches easier to distribute to people who don't own Max, but it's really not much different than just running the patch normally.
I think it is possible to prepare an installer, for any platform, that contains Pd and all the necessary externals etc. that will automatically load everything that it needs in order to do its thing. Each platform will have to deal with this in different way but often a simple shell script will take care of everything. This way you can distribute a "standalone" version of whatever program you have done.
./MiS
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
On Tue, 29 Jun 2010 20:48:30 +0000, David Schaffer schafferdavid@hotmail.com wrote:
Is there anyone out there who could teach me how to make goodlooking stand alone pd apps, I mean pd patches with a nice looking GUI on top that would play on any computer even without pd installed. I saw this guy the other day with his max based lighting board stand alone app. and I thought it was pretty cool... Thanks!
Hi David,
You could do what RjDj are doing with their composition tool, and use PyPd to make an interface between Pd and Python, and then build a GUI in Python. There are a number of cross-platform ways of doing the latter, including wxPython, PyTK, PyGTK, PyQT, Pygame (SDL), Pyglet (OpenGL), PyOpenGL. RjDj use wxPython as far as I know, unless that changed recently.
Here is PyPd: http://mccormick.cx/projects/PyPd
Once you're done you can make cross platform binaries with py2app, py2exe, or a great tool I found out about recently at PyCon AU: "Esky", which freezes your app and also provides for automatic updates.
Cheers,
Chris.
You can do quite a bit with the GUI objects in Pd-extended. Here are
some to try:
button ticker entry canvas_name window_name
.hc
On Jun 29, 2010, at 4:48 PM, David Schaffer wrote:
Hi,
Is there anyone out there who could teach me how to make goodlooking stand alone pd apps, I mean pd patches with a nice looking
GUI on top that would play on any computer even without pd
installed. I saw this guy the other day with his max based lighting
board stand alone app. and I thought it was pretty cool... Thanks!D.S
http://www.flickr.com/photos/schafferdavid/ http://audioblog.arteradio.com/David_Schaffer/
Hotmail: Free, trusted and rich email service. Get it
now._______________________________________________ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
All information should be free. - the hacker ethic
-
Bernardo Barros -
chrism -
David Schaffer -
Hans-Christoph Steiner -
Mathieu Bouchard -
Michal Seta -
Mike Moser-Booth -
Pedro Lopes -
quietdidit＠gmail.com