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

[Hans-Christoph Steiner]

Miller had a question that is still unanswered.  It seems to me more  
productive to keep the patch in the pending/closed state until  
someone answers the question.  Otherwise that seems me that it is  
abandoned.  The idea of the "Pending" state is to trigger a comment,  
or clean up that patch if its abandoned.

.hc

On Oct 18, 2006, at 3:58 AM, SourceForge.net wrote:

> Patches item #1094912, was opened at 2005-01-03 11:56
> Message generated for change (Comment added) made by zmoelnig
> 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: Open
> 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: IOhannes m zmölnig (zmoelnig)
> Date: 2006-10-18 09:58
>
> Message:
> Logged In: YES
> user_id=564396
>
> as carmen has pointed out on the list, miller had just very
> recently articulated a very similar idea.
> even though it is unlikely that he will use the patch here,
> i reopen this issue (and hopefully will close it again soon
> when an equivalent mechanism will be part of pd)
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Comment By: Hans-Christoph Steiner (eighthave)
> Date: 2006-10-17 07:41
>
> 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: 2006-01-29 03:34
>
> 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 06:36
>
> 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


------------------------------------------------------------------------

If you are not part of the solution, you are part of the  
problem.        - Eldridge Cleaver