[PD] [packOSC] reentrancy problem

Roman Haefeli reduzent at gmail.com
Tue Nov 17 10:15:24 CET 2015

Hey, thanks for addressing the issue.

On Mon, 2015-11-16 at 15:25 -0500, Martin Peach wrote:
> So I updated packOSC in svn to detect reentrancy and post a message.

The message says:
error: packOSC: Use bundle to send multiple messages

I find this message a bit misleading as I'm not at all trying to create
a bundle. I'm simply creating an OSC packet that in returns triggers
another OSC packet to be generated. I expect [packOSC] to treat them
absolutely separately.

> It seems too complicated to allow it.

I see. It's not complicated at all on a patch level to make [packOSC]
allow reentrancy. See attached patch. I can live easily without it being
fixed in [packOSC].

And this is the _expected_ output from my previous patch (and it
actually _is_ the output of the currently attached patch with the

FIRST: /i/am/reentrant 64

> Here's a patch that does what I believe you want using the preferred
> method of bundles.

That's not quite what I want. I don't mean to create a bundle. For
certain reasons it's hard to avoid reentrancy in the framework I'm
working on, but buffering the output of [packOSC] as shown in the
attached patch works.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: packOSC-reentrancy-fixed.pd
Type: text/x-puredata
Size: 829 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-list/attachments/20151117/9355c057/attachment.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 473 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-list/attachments/20151117/9355c057/attachment.sig>

More information about the Pd-list mailing list