[PD] phasor~ and osc~ right inlet: exact timing
reduzierer at yahoo.de
Fri Apr 16 16:18:07 CEST 2010
On Fri, 2010-04-16 at 16:00 +0200, Matteo Sisti Sette wrote:
> > Actually, I think (it's not the first time I say that, I guess), that
> > all inlets of object classes, which have signal outlets (or all
> > objects that convert from message domain to signal domain) should
> > take the exact timing into account.
> Yeah! No object should be left out! Every single object should take
> exact timing into accounts, or at the very least, have a "v" counterpart
> that does (I guess the objects that don't are faster, so when sub-block
> accuracy is not needed one may actually prefer the "inaccurate" version).
Actually, the most cases (such as [*~],the left inleft of
[osc~]/[phasor~] etc.) can be covered with a - let's call it [vsig~]
abstraction based on [vline~].
> By the way, you say all those objects that convert from message to
> signal domain. Why not the other way round too? I always wished there
> was a [vthreshold~] for example.
Right. There is [vsnapshot~], which does something similar, though it's
not truely converting from audio domain to message domain, since only
the resulting value is taken from the audio domain, whereas the timing
still comes from the message domain. From what I know, the message comes
one block late.
> Or is it physically impossible? I mean perhaps you get the information
> one block too late?
I think so. Can someone confirm who knows?
More information about the Pd-list