[PD] Cyclone in vanilla?

Julian Peterson julianpeterson at mac.com
Mon Apr 21 22:27:17 CEST 2008


[expr pow($f1,$f2)]
or
[expr~ pow($v1,$f2)]
or
[expr~ pow($v1,$v2)]
etc.

I don't know why you consider this an omission?
JP


Andy Farnell wrote:
> Yes. Please don't take this the wrong way Derek, I sincerely appreciate
> the suggestion.
>
> Everything can be done with [expr~], so why don't we just rename Pd
> to [expr~]? :)
>
> Seriously, raising one number to a power is an essential, fundamental operation
> Is there any plausible excuse for its omission from core Pd?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 20:53:00 +0200
> Derek Holzer <derek at umatic.nl> wrote:
>
>   
>> Can the job be done with [expr~]?
>>
>> d.
>>
>> Andy Farnell wrote:
>>     
>>> Did I read that Cyclone is to be incorporated into vanilla Pd?
>>>
>>> Having discovered too late that [pow~] is not part of vanilla
>>> I am about to remove the constraint of using vanilla Pd for 
>>> the synthetic sound design book since it is incomplete without
>>> basic mathematical  operators.
>>>
>>> andy
>>>
>>>       
>> -- 
>> derek holzer ::: http://www.umatic.nl ::: http://blog.myspace.com/macumbista
>> ---Oblique Strategy # 190:
>> "You can only make one dot at a time"
>>     
>
>
>   





More information about the Pd-list mailing list