[PD] Pd-extended 0.43 updates: lots of new editing features

Jonathan Wilkes jancsika at yahoo.com
Thu Jul 7 23:14:25 CEST 2011



--- On Thu, 7/7/11, Hans-Christoph Steiner <hans at at.or.at> wrote:

> From: Hans-Christoph Steiner <hans at at.or.at>
> Subject: Re: [PD] Pd-extended 0.43 updates: lots of new editing features
> To: "Jonathan Wilkes" <jancsika at yahoo.com>, "Ivica Ico Bukvic" <ico at vt.edu>
> Cc: pd-list at iem.at
> Date: Thursday, July 7, 2011, 9:20 PM
> 
> On Thu, 07 Jul 2011 10:06 -0700, "Jonathan Wilkes" <jancsika at yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> > 
> > --- On Thu, 7/7/11, Hans-Christoph Steiner <hans at at.or.at>
> wrote:
> > 
> > > From: Hans-Christoph Steiner <hans at at.or.at>
> > > Subject: Re: [PD] Pd-extended 0.43 updates: lots
> of new editing features
> > > To: "Ivica Ico Bukvic" <ico at vt.edu>
> > > Cc: pd-list at iem.at
> > > Date: Thursday, July 7, 2011, 5:33 PM
> > > 
> > > On Thu, 07 Jul 2011 16:39 +0200, "Ivica Ico
> Bukvic" <ico at vt.edu> wrote:
> > > > > I ended up refactoring the magic glass
> and
> > > highlighting code quite a
> > > > > bit, I think there might be something
> worth
> > > checking out.  As for
> > > > > other bug fixes, it would be great to
> have them
> > > in the patch tracker
> > > > > so we can sort them out.  It would
> take me a
> > > massive amount of time to
> > > > > figure out what code changes are for
> what in
> > > pdl2ork since there isn't
> > > > > any version control (that I could find
> at least)
> > > and it seems to be a
> > > > > mix of 0.42 and 0.43 versions.
> > > > 
> > > > It's based off of 0.42.6 extended tree. As
> for
> > > submitting patches, I've
> > > > been doing this in the past. Alas, a good
> number of
> > > them never got any
> > > > attention which is not very encouraging.
> > > 
> > > If you look at the patch tracker, and filter on
> Closed
> > > ones, you'll see
> > > which ones get accepted.  Most do.  It takes a
> > > lot of time to review
> > > patches, so if they don't cleanly apply and
> build, then I'm
> > > not really
> > > likely to pursue it much further.  I've tried
> figuring
> > > out patches like
> > > that in the past, and it just takes too much time
> to try to
> > > figure out
> > > what's wrong, etc.  and it doesn't speak well of
> the
> > > patch if it doesn't
> > > past the first hurdle.
> > > 
> > > .hc
> > 
> > bugfix 3127123 Closed
> 
> http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=3127123&group_id=55736&atid=478072
> Accepted with comments.  Am I missing something?
> 
> > bugfix 3110267 Open, no comments, no assignees
> > patch 3077431 Open, comments, I emailed the cyclone
> author to ask if he's 
> > ok with Ico's improvements...
> 
> No word from the upstream author of cyclone, he's not
> active anymore. 
> The focus of the cyclone library is to be clones of Max/MSP
> objects. 

The Max/MSP stuff is proprietary, so we can only guess at how the code is actually written.  So to get a "clone" of a Max object one needs to a) read the Max docs, and b) compare results from using [foo] in Max to using [foo] in Pd.

Ico seems to be saying that Max's [coll] isn't causing audio dropouts, and Pd's is, and that his patch fixes this.  AFAICT his implementation still adheres to the interface for [coll] listed in the Max docs, so I don't see how this isn't a better clone of Max's [coll] behavior.

> I'm not in a place to test that stuff, so I'm not likely to
> handle
> patches for cyclone.  I don't really have a criteria
> to judge if its
> correct, unless its a really simple bugfix.

But if Mr. Czaja says, "Sure, go ahead," you won't have a problem with this patch, right?

> 
> > bugfix 3109768 Open, and I added a new comment (Note:
> the comment I added 
> > is fixed in Pd-l2ork)
> 
> donno, haven't reviewed
> 
> > bugfix 3108513 Open, no comments
> 
> patch out of date, applies to 0.42 but not 0.43 
> 
> > * bugfix 3106837 Open, comments
> 
> commented: Looks worth including, but with GOP bugs, I'm
> currently
> waiting to see what Miller is going to do with GOP
> restructuring before
> tackling this stuff.
> I still don't really have a
> grasp of the GOP code,
> so I don't know what the repercussions of GOP-related
> patches are.  From
> my experience, one little simple fix causes some weird
> behavior
> elsewhere.
> 
> > bugfix 3106799 Open, comments, bug still exists (Note:
> fixed in Pd-l2ork)
> > bugfix 3102512 Open, comments
> > patch 1670440 Closed, accepted
> > 
> > If any of these didn't apply cleanly and didn't build,
> there's no comment 
> > indicating so.
> 
> I haven't necessarily had time to review everything,
> nagging and poking
> me is perfectly appropriate if you think I should review
> something.

Ok, but it's not really a solution, because the time I have to nag and poke is probably about the same amount that you have to review stuff.

-Jonathan

> And
> anything assigned to Miller and reviewed positively by
> IOhannes I'm
> going to defer any action on until Miller responds.
> 
> .hc
> 
> > 
> > -Jonathan
> > 
> > > 
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Pd-list at iem.at
> > > mailing list
> > > UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
> > >
> > 
> 
> 



More information about the Pd-list mailing list