[PD] weird behavior with dynamically created abstractions (sound doesn't work)
adrcki at gmail.com
Wed Nov 21 20:13:49 CET 2012
Thanks for that. Using the two outputs of the four channel version works in
stereo now just fine. When I try to delete two outputs and inputs from
[pddom2.from~] and [pddom2.to~] respectively, it won't work anymore. Is
what I say clear?...
Anyway, I guess this way it's fine. Thanks again.
On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 8:52 PM, Enrique Erne <enrique at netpd.org> wrote:
> Alexandros, Thanks for reporting, somehow it was registering as
> no-audio abstraction. This commit should fix it:
> Please try the newest verison @ https://github.com/thisconnect/pddom
> and let me know if that works for you. I suggest to:
> - copy/paste the abstractions form examples/multichannel into your project
> - rename the abstractions to pddom2.to~ / pddom2.from~
> - remove the unused 2 outlets~ s~/r~ parts
> Let me know if that works for you, I will have time tomorrow during
> the day to have a look at it.
> On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 5:13 PM, Alexandros Drymonitis <adrcki at gmail.com>
> > Enrique, I've been playing around with pddom and it works very nicely, I
> > only have trouble making it stereo. I tried to follow the
> > examples/multi/pd-dom4-help.pd changing it a bit to make it stereo, but
> > won't really work. Is it something to do with the right most outlet of
> > [pddom.from~] that connects to the right most inlet of [pddom.to~] in
> > mono version? In you multichannel version there are only tilde outlets in
> > [pddom4.from~] and the right most inlet of [pddom4.to~] receives
> nothing. I
> > tried to modify it accordingly but with no luck.
> > Could you help?
> > On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 10:43 AM, Enrique Erne <enrique at netpd.org>
> >> > how can you control the abstractions you add to nodes, say with a
> >> > slider? Or do you have to create your nodes with abstractions with
> >> > (like the proposed method in the readme file) and that should be it?
> >> (I forgot to hit reply to all)
> >> It depends on your needs, but [pddom] does not help you building the
> >> interface. The examples/ui illustrates simple ways of controlling the
> >> dynamically created abstractions with 1 interface.
> >> Another way is to use the abstractions own window, that you can open
> >> with [vis $1( where $1 is the position (number) of the instantiated
> >> abstraction. This is of corse if you don't mind having each interface
> >> in it's own window.
> >> To locate and open exactly the one abstraction vis send a [; $1.$2.vis
> >> findparent( command to [namecanvas $1.$2.vis]. This is the only reason
> >> why there is a [namecanvas] inside [pddom.from] and [pddom.from~].
> >> This also requires [pddom.from] and [pddom.from~] to be located in the
> >> main canvas of each abstraction and not hidden somewhere deeper.
> >> How are you planing to use pddom? Do you open the same abstraction
> >> multiple times or do you wish to combine many different abstractions
> >> with their own user interface?
> >> > The only bad thing is the dsp having to go off and on again.
> >> If you are on OS X turning off/on DSP
> >> takes a long time (or at least it used to take over 100ms a few years
> >> ago). On other operating systems it was never a problem iirc.
> >> You could try and increase the Delay time under Audio Settings and
> >> test if that helps.
> >> Alternatively there is another "trick" that works without turning
> >> off/on DSP, this is creating 1 ~ object and deleting it again. See
> >> also tests/basic/test-dsp-update~.pd
> >> It disables the internal off/on update mechanism by [dsp_ disable( and
> >> uses a subpatch for the DSP tree update workaround. See [pd
> >> dsp-tree-update-workaround], but all your messages that change the DSP
> >> tree need to go through that subpatch.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Pd-list