[PD] pduino rewrite

Roman Haefeli reduzent at gmail.com
Thu Sep 15 19:51:18 CEST 2011

On Thu, 2011-09-15 at 13:29 -0400, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-09-15 at 18:54 +0200, Ingo wrote:
> > Hi Hans,
> > 
> > unfortunately I am not really good at C or C++ so I have to stick with
> > simplifying within Pd until I get there. But I am actually working on it so
> > I'll be able to replace certain objects in my patches by more efficient
> > externals. Anyway, I think in the case of simplifying the pduino patch
> > another external would be rather contra productive.
> Makes sense, I think having it as a Pd abstraction is good too, I did
> write it that way rather than in C :)  I was just saying that C would be
> more efficient.
> > The optimized multiple debytemasks (up to 56 input pins) as a Pd-patch are
> > attached. I just called it differently because this was taken from an old
> > display keypad patch that I had done before.
> > 
> > I am using this in my remote control unit and it's working perfectly.
> The [change -1] is a great idea, I just committed that to bytemask.pd
> and debytemask.pd.  But the [pd resolve-bits_0-7] abstractions seem
> quite labor-intensive, but they work.  I think it would work better to
> use multiple instances of [debytemask].

But then you need a row of [+ 8] ([+ 16], [+ 24]) for each instance of
debytemask. So, it's still tedious work, whether you're using an
abstraction or copies of the subpatch.


More information about the Pd-list mailing list