[PD] opinions on the issue of concurrent implementations

[Jonathan Wilkes]

>________________________________
>From: Patrice Colet <colet.patrice at free.fr>
>To: pd-list <pd-list at iem.at> 
>Cc: IOhannes m zmölnig <zmoelnig at iem.at> 
>Sent: Saturday, October 6, 2012 10:41 AM
>Subject: Re: [PD] opinions on the issue of concurrent implementations (was: getting sample rate of file loaded into an array)
>
>
>> De: "IOhannes m zmölnig" <zmoelnig at iem.at>
>> On 10/04/2012 05:04 PM, Patrice Colet wrote:
>> > 
>> >  We should use C language only when we need it, in the example of
>> >  [waveinfo] vs [soundfile_info], both aren't the good way for me,
>> > we just need the [binfile] external for reading the header, and all
>> > the other stuff can be done into a pd patch.
>> > 
>> 
>> we don't need [binfile]!
>> 
>
>how do you read the header without binfile? 

I don't know a way without externals.
 
Anyway, I think you're being trolled.
 
-Jonathan
 
>
>> Pd is proven to be turing complete, so it should be easy enough to
>> write
>> an operating system entirely in Pd (that is: a patch) that will allow
>> you to read/write soundfiles in any desired format.
>
>
>pd is not even able to read extended precision, that's why pd can't tell about aiff samplerate.
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Pd-list at iem.at mailing list
>UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
>
>
>