[PD-dev] [ pure-data-Patches-1094912 ] message-based access to the audio api

[Thomas Grill]

Hey all,
how long is the time interval for patch tracker items to vanish after 
they have been set to "pending"?
I find it a utterly bad idea to do that, given the delay time Miller 
needs to apply patches. If this is going to be common practice i'll not 
waste my time any longer by posting patches to the tracker.
greetings,
Thomas


SourceForge.net schrieb:
> Patches item #1094912, was opened at 2005-01-03 05:56
> Message generated for change (Comment added) made by eighthave
> You can respond by visiting: 
> https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=478072&aid=1094912&group_id=55736
>
> Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread,
> including the initial issue submission, for this request,
> not just the latest update.
> Category: puredata
> Group: wishlist
>   
>> Status: Pending
>>     
> Resolution: None
> Priority: 6
> Submitted By: Tim Blechmann (timblech)
> Assigned to: Miller Puckette (millerpuckette)
> Summary: message-based access to the audio api
>
> Initial Comment:
> attached is a patch that simplifies message-based
> access to the audio api:
>
> pd understands the following messages:
> audio-samplerate
> audio-delay
> audio-dacblocksize
> audio-scheduler
> audio-device
> audio-device-in
> audio-device-out
>
> audio-dacblocksize and audio-scheduler require devel_0_38
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>   
>> Comment By: Hans-Christoph Steiner (eighthave)
>>     
> Date: 2006-10-17 01:41
>
> Message:
> Logged In: YES 
> user_id=27104
>
> this has been here for a long while with no activity, so I
> am setting it to Pending.  It'll be automatically set to
> closed after a while if no one tends to it.
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Comment By: Hans-Christoph Steiner (eighthave)
> Date: 2006-01-28 21:34
>
> Message:
> Logged In: YES 
> user_id=27104
>
> I am liking the idea of sending messages to pd to get all of
> this kind of information more and more.  I am thinking that
> a generic "get" message would be useful here.  Like this:
>
> [;pd get audio-samplerate(
> [;pd get audio-delay(
> [;pd get audio-dacblocksize(
> [;pd get audio-scheduler(
> [;pd get audio-device(
> [;pd get audio-device-in(
> [;pd get audio-device-out(
>
> Then also:
>
> [;pd get path(
> [;pd get libs(
> [;pd get version(
> [;pd get dsp(
>
> Then you could get similar messages from each canvas/patch:
>
> [;pd-my_patch.pd get editmode(
> [;pd-my_patch.pd get vis(
> [;pd-my_patch.pd get namespace(
> [;pd-my_patch.pd get canvasname(
>
> You would retrieve these messages with a [receive] of the
> same name, i.e.:
>
> [r pd]
> |
> [route version]
> |
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Comment By: Miller Puckette (millerpuckette)
> Date: 2005-05-18 00:36
>
> Message:
> Logged In: YES 
> user_id=313747
>
> I'm scared of this one... how important is it to have all the
> different audio parameters handled by separate messages?  I
> think the "audio_dialog" message should suffice for setting
> audio parameters...
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> You can respond by visiting: 
> https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=478072&aid=1094912&group_id=55736
>
> _______________________________________________
> PD-dev mailing list
> PD-dev at iem.at
> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
>
>
>   

-- 
Thomas Grill
http://grrrr.org