[PD] midi to osc?

Derek Holzer 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 ::: 
http://www.vimeo.com/macumbista :::
---Oblique Strategy # 44:
"Discard an axiom"

More information about the Pd-list mailing list