Hi,
This must have been discussed in the list before, but I couldn't find anything in the archives because it's difficult to generate a meaningful set of keywords for this......
In a merely fortuitous way, I found out that if you send a message starting with the keyword "dsp" into an inlet of a subpatch or abstraction, it is not passed through the inlet.
Attached is an example, i.e.:
[ ( | [pd mysubpatch]
where the subpatch contains:
[inlet] | [print]
If you write "dsp something" in the message and click it, the message won't be printed!!!! (while any other message will)
It seems like the inlet itself "catches" it...
I don't know what [inlet] is supposed to do with messages starting with "dsp". I thought it may perhaps switch~ off the subpatch, but it doesn't.
Is this a bug or a feature? Is it documented somewhere?
Thanks m.
This is not a good answer for you but you can use this solution to
send the message |dsp 1(.
(see the patch).
++
Jack
Le 1 avr. 08 à 18:05, matteo sisti sette a écrit :
Hi,
This must have been discussed in the list before, but I couldn't find anything in the archives because it's difficult to generate a meaningful set of keywords for this......
In a merely fortuitous way, I found out that if you send a message starting with the keyword "dsp" into an inlet of a subpatch or abstraction, it is not passed through the inlet.
Attached is an example, i.e.:
[ ( | [pd mysubpatch]
where the subpatch contains:
[inlet] | [print]
If you write "dsp something" in the message and click it, the message won't be printed!!!! (while any other message will)
It seems like the inlet itself "catches" it...
I don't know what [inlet] is supposed to do with messages starting
with "dsp". I thought it may perhaps switch~ off the subpatch, but it doesn't.Is this a bug or a feature? Is it documented somewhere?
Thanks m.
-- Matteo Sisti Sette matteosistisette@gmail.com http:// www.matteosistisette.com<inlet_dsp_messages2.pd>______________________ _________________________ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/ listinfo/pd-list
Oops! I'm using "dsp" for objects to intercommunicate, but I had meant to protect anyone from stumbling on it. Obviously I missed something.
I can suggest many possible workarounds, but will get around to fixing this someday.
cheers Miller
On Tue, Apr 01, 2008 at 06:05:37PM +0200, matteo sisti sette wrote:
Hi,
This must have been discussed in the list before, but I couldn't find anything in the archives because it's difficult to generate a meaningful set of keywords for this......
In a merely fortuitous way, I found out that if you send a message starting with the keyword "dsp" into an inlet of a subpatch or abstraction, it is not passed through the inlet.
Attached is an example, i.e.:
[ ( | [pd mysubpatch]
where the subpatch contains:
[inlet] | [print]
If you write "dsp something" in the message and click it, the message won't be printed!!!! (while any other message will)
It seems like the inlet itself "catches" it...
I don't know what [inlet] is supposed to do with messages starting with "dsp". I thought it may perhaps switch~ off the subpatch, but it doesn't.
Is this a bug or a feature? Is it documented somewhere?
Thanks m.
-- Matteo Sisti Sette matteosistisette@gmail.com http://www.matteosistisette.com
#N canvas 667 288 450 300 12; #N canvas 689 62 450 300 mysubpatch 0; #X obj 169 51 inlet; #X obj 169 96 print DATA; #X connect 0 0 1 0; #X restore 147 184 pd mysubpatch; #X msg 80 124 1 2 3; #X msg 120 92 bla bla bla; #X msg 153 148 dsp 1; #X connect 1 0 0 0; #X connect 2 0 0 0; #X connect 3 0 0 0;
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Jack wrote
This is not a good answer for you but you can use this solution to send the message |dsp 1(.
Miller wrote:
I can suggest many possible workarounds, but will get around to fixing this someday.
Thank you both; don't worry for solutions/workarounds: I wasn't using this message very extensively so it was trivial to work it around without need for an especially elegant or general solution: I just changed the message.
The difficult part was to figure out what the hell was going on :)
I was simply curious to know whether it was a known/unknown bug or an undocumented feature.
Thanks again.
Miller Puckette wrote:
Oops! I'm using "dsp" for objects to intercommunicate, but I had meant to protect anyone from stumbling on it. Obviously I missed something.
the really bad thing is (as indicated in my other mail):
[dsp( | [+~]
weird that i _never_ stumbled across this, even though it was so obvious!
fgmasdr IOhannes
matteo sisti sette wrote:
It seems like the inlet itself "catches" it...
I don't know what [inlet] is supposed to do with messages starting with "dsp". I thought it may perhaps switch~ off the subpatch, but it doesn't.
Is this a bug or a feature? Is it documented somewhere?
i don't know whether it is a bug or a feature. it is not documented afaik.
what i do know is: "dsp" is a special message used to turn turn on the audio-processing of a dsp-object. all dsp-objects (aka tilde-objects) have a method for the special keyword "dsp".
implementation-wise, [inlet] is a "sub-class" of [inlet~], therefore it also has a method for "dsp".
now for the fun-part:
[dsp 1( | [sig~]
fgnmasdr. IOhannes
Hi List
I am a bit stuck with my ongoing experiments.
What i am trying to do is to send acceleration (xyz or pry) data from
the wii/osculator to pd/pmpd to have it visualized
with some "masses" generated with pmpd.
I would liek to simply generate some force in the x or -x dirction to
move a mass.
The data i get from the wii is i guess already "accelleration" and
not absolute position, since i would liek to avoid using the ir-
sensor bar.
I am missing a mathematical trick there, any suggestions or hints for
further reading. I was working with the "mapping"-abstractions, which
are
- as it seems - for any type of conversion.
Thans very much
Luigi
Luigi Rensinghoff wrote:
I would liek to simply generate some force in the x or -x dirction to move a mass.
The data i get from the wii is i guess already "accelleration" and not absolute position, since i would liek to avoid using the ir-sensor bar.
One of Isaac Newton's laws of motion [1]
F = m a
force = mass * acceleration
where force and acceleration are vectors
I might be misunderstanding what you need, though.
Claude
From what I understand about pmpd, it looks like you can send an force
message to a mass object. As Claude says, F=m*a, so you can calculate the force to send to the object based on the object's mass and the acceleration data coming from the Wiimote.
You will probably have to scale the signals coming from the Wiimote to use in your application. For example, if the acceleration on one axis is 542, you will have to decide what you want that to mean in your model.
Also remember that gravity causes acceleration, so even if you aren't moving the Wiimote you will still detect accelertion. You may want to try to remove that from your calculations.
I'm not sure if any of this is helping. I've been playing around with accelerometers a little bit lately, so I might be able to help you, but I'm still not sure I fully understand what you're trying to do and where you're running into trouble.
andy
On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 3:45 AM, Claude Heiland-Allen claudiusmaximus@goto10.org wrote:
Luigi Rensinghoff wrote:
I would liek to simply generate some force in the x or -x dirction to move a mass.
The data i get from the wii is i guess already "accelleration" and not absolute position, since i would liek to avoid using the ir-sensor bar.
One of Isaac Newton's laws of motion [1]
F = m a
force = mass * acceleration
where force and acceleration are vectors
I might be misunderstanding what you need, though.
Claude
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton%27s_laws_of_motion
-- http://claudiusmaximus.goto10.org
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Hi List
I am a bit stuck with my ongoing experiments.
What i am trying to do is to send acceleration (xyz or pry) data from
the wii/osculator to pd/pmpd to have it visualized
with some "masses" generated with pmpd.
I would liek to simply generate some force in the x or -x dirction to
move a mass.
The data i get from the wii is i guess already "accelleration" and
not absolute position, since i would liek to avoid using the ir-
sensor bar.
I am missing a mathematical trick there, any suggestions or hints for
further reading. I was working with the "mapping"-abstractions, which
are
- as it seems - for any type of conversion.
Thans very much
Luigi
-
Andrew Turley -
Claude Heiland-Allen -
IOhannes m zmoelnig -
Jack -
Luigi Rensinghoff -
matteo sisti sette -
Miller Puckette