[PD] Cycle~ difference with Max5. Was: Update cyclone maintenance

[Fred Jan Kraan]

Hi Alexandre,

> So, hey Fred, would you be able to get into sourceforge and close all
> the bug reports that have already been taken care of? 
> 
> I'm not sure how to get in it and do it. I guess I should do that to
> cause I'm aware of a few things that are going on, so if anyone could
> tell me how to do it, I'd like to try and collaborate.
> 

IOhannes changed the policy, so any registered developer can close
issues. I already started closing some of which I was reasonable sure
they were fixed. Some others, I want to check  first.

> Moreover, still about [cycle~], I just wanted to make sure it behaves
> exactly like it says in Max 5 documentation. They descibre how it needs
> a table with 513 points, and that the 513 needs to be the same as the
> 1st because of the interpolation (I assume it does a simple linear
> interpolation then, right?). In the case of a table with 512 points,
> [cycle~] will add a 513th point that's a copy of the first. Anyway, this
> is what it says in the documentation and I'd like to check with you if
> it's working exactly like that as well. Perhaps you could mention that
> too in the help file.

Yesterday, I updated the cyclone binary distributions at
http://puredata.info/Members/fjkraan. The simplest way to install the
correct one is using the deken-plugin:
https://github.com/pure-data/deken. If you use Pd-extended, you have to
rename or remove the original cyclone directory, to prevent having two
cyclones.

Indeed, simple interpolation is used. From the cycle_perform:
*out++ = f1 + frac * (f2 - f1);

I replaced the core of the cycle_gettable, and in case of an external
array, the 513th sample is copied from the first.

I do not completely understand the Description of the Max5 cycle~: when
should I make the 513th sample the same as the 512th and when should I
use the first? The latest implementation always uses the first.

> 
> cheers

Fred Jan
> 
> 2015-06-09 10:46 GMT-03:00 Alexandre Torres Porres <porres at gmail.com
> <mailto:porres at gmail.com>>:
> 
>     collected all bug reports related to cyclone. It'd be good to
>     commitor close/mark as fixed.
> 
>     http://sourceforge.net/p/pure-data/bugs/991/
> 
>     http://sourceforge.net/p/pure-data/bugs/950/
> 
>     http://sourceforge.net/p/pure-data/bugs/652/
> 
>     http://sourceforge.net/p/pure-data/bugs/647/
> 
>     http://sourceforge.net/p/pure-data/bugs/215/
> 
>     http://sourceforge.net/p/pure-data/bugs/163/
> 
>     http://sourceforge.net/p/pure-data/bugs/78/
> 
>     http://sourceforge.net/p/pure-data/bugs/1188/
> 
>     http://sourceforge.net/p/pure-data/bugs/1186/
> 
>     http://sourceforge.net/p/pure-data/bugs/1128/ (that was me actually,
>     haha)
> 
>     2015-06-09 10:15 GMT-03:00 Alexandre Torres Porres <porres at gmail.com
>     <mailto:porres at gmail.com>>:
> 
>         another report for [rand~], by the way, maybe you should get
>         involved here and mark them as fixed 
> 
>         http://sourceforge.net/p/pure-data/bugs/1177/
> 
> 
> 
>         2015-06-09 10:12 GMT-03:00 Alexandre Torres Porres
>         <porres at gmail.com <mailto:porres at gmail.com>>:
> 
>                 About the sample-offset, I have some problem
>                 understanding how it works,
>                 and have to change it anyhow to fix the issue
>                 (garray_getarraywords
>                 related on 64-bit systems). 
> 
> 
>             seems there was a bug report about this :) 
>             http://sourceforge.net/p/pure-data/bugs/1180/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>     _______________________________________________
>     Pd-list at lists.iem.at <mailto:Pd-list at lists.iem.at> mailing list
>     UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
>     http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
> 
>