[PD] how to make a proportional canon
derek at umatic.nl
Wed Jul 11 11:44:10 CEST 2007
yes, of course I meant a non-repeating number. I was concentrating on
the end-results rather then the details of the process, but it's a
useful distinction when trying to document it. Thanks.
Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Jul 2007, Derek Holzer wrote:
>> Dear Libero, [...]
>> where $0 will be replaced by a new random number which
>> is unique to each abstraction).
> Dear Derek, please see
> $0 numbers are just as predictable as the random numbers in that
> cartoon. they form the sequence: 1000, 1001, 1002, 1003, 1004, 1005,
> 1006, 1007, 1008, 1009, 1010, 1011, ...
> In pd, it's not really important how those numbers are picked as long as
> there are no duplicates. In practice, it's easiest to count up and not
> bother reusing numbers when abstractions are destroyed. This is what pd
> does. This strategy is not without shortcomings, but few people ever
> noticed it.
> _ _ __ ___ _____ ________ _____________ _____________________ ...
> | Mathieu Bouchard - t�l:+1.514.383.3801, Montr�al QC Canada
derek holzer ::: http://www.umatic.nl ::: http://blog.myspace.com/macumbista
---Oblique Strategy # 174:
More information about the Pd-list