[PD] midi to osc?
derek at umatic.nl
Thu Jul 9 20:50:23 CEST 2009
I knew somebody would have to complicate my simple, straightforward
Why hasn't somebody made this the "default" set of OSC objects in
Extended by now then? Or perhaps replaced the original oscx libraries
with these in a non-breaking way? And why is it split into two different
Couldn't these objects be wrapped to give the same name as the standard
OSC objects, but with whatever "better" functionality the list gurus
have decided they give? For n00bs, having to use two different
non-standard/non-default libs is just super confusing, and distracts
from the task at hand, which is not to goof around with configuring Pd
and/or importing libs but to communicate between two OSC apps.
Also for writing the FLOSS Manual, a "correct" chapter on OSC now means
either Path or [import] has to be discussed first, and then two
different libs must be used. Big fat bummer!
Can anybody say (in a few sentences rather than a lengthly thread) why
one wouldn't use the simpler OSC objects for such a simple task? Points
for brevity, nobody gets paid by the word around here ;-)
IOhannes m zmölnig wrote:
> i agree with everything derek has said, but one thing:
> do NOT use oscx for OSC-communication.
> instead use mrpeach's net and osc libraries.
> [packOSC]+[udpsend] for sending osc
> [udpreceive]+[unpackOSC] for receiving osc
> for the reasons see the archives of this list...
::: derek holzer ::: http://blog.myspace.com/macumbista :::
---Oblique Strategy # 44:
"Discard an axiom"
More information about the Pd-list