[PD] Cyclone in vanilla?

Andy Farnell padawan12 at obiwannabe.co.uk
Tue Apr 22 01:42:37 CEST 2008

On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 16:27:17 -0400
Julian Peterson <julianpeterson at mac.com> wrote:

> [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

Hi Julian,

Thanks for the suggestion 

I consider it an omission because [pow~] is a fundamental operation
that deserves its own object in core Pd.

For the same reason you would consider [cos~] to be an omission
if you were forced to construct it from a series approximation.

[expr~] is unsatisfactory. It does not suit beginners because of
its syntax and is computationally inefficient. It is a useful catch-all
for certain situations and should only be used where necessary and when 
no other option is available.

Same goes for [z~], another fundamental (vital) DSP primitive that
is bizzarely missing from vanilla Pd.

There are several other objects that, while possible to construct
using combinations of primititives, are clumsy and confusing for
students to work around, such as [abs~]

It is high time we got together as a community with Miller and
patched up these holes in the axiomatic object set. Vanilla Pd
is incomplete without some additions.


Use the source

More information about the Pd-list mailing list