[PD] So [bang~] can't "bang" in less than 64 blocksize, huh?

Jonathan Wilkes jancsika at yahoo.com
Sun Mar 15 17:53:56 CET 2015

But [print~] has a float method for specifying consecutive blocks, so that shouldn't matter.

     On Saturday, March 14, 2015 2:36 AM, Alexandre Torres Porres <porres at gmail.com> wrote:

 It seems there are other objects that somehow restrict themselves to a 64 size block minimum.
print~ will always start printing from the beginning of a 64 block period
snapshot~ will always output the last sample from an audio block of 64
there must be other examples...
2015-03-14 2:02 GMT-03:00 Alexandre Torres Porres <porres at gmail.com>:

attached patch
2015-03-14 2:02 GMT-03:00 Alexandre Torres Porres <porres at gmail.com>:

I was trying to get a bang at every sample and found out that the minimum time bang~ works is at the 64 blocksize, check attached patch.
Anyway, no question, just saying... but yeah, I don't see why it has to be this way. Hopefully it can increase its resolution someday.

Pd-list at lists.iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-list/attachments/20150315/10ac6e08/attachment.html>

More information about the Pd-list mailing list