[PD] a [wrap~] for control computation ?
Johannes M Zmoelnig
zmoelnig at iem.at
Wed Nov 10 14:01:32 CET 2004
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)
More information about the Pd-list