[PD] fexpr~ block limitations - bug

[Shahrokh Yadegari]

Sorry, the object is compiled for OS X and will not work on linux. I am
close to sending out an alpha, in which I may either find a linux setup to
compile, or attach the sources for somebody else to compile for linux. I
will also need somebody to compile and test the object within Windows
environment. Please let me know if anybody is interested.

best,
Shahrokh


On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 9:02 AM, Jonghyun Kim <agitato816 at gmail.com> wrote:

> thanks for your effort! anyway, how to open the "expr~.d_fat" file on
> linux?
>
> akntk
>
> On Sat, Nov 7, 2015 at 1:50 AM, Shahrokh Yadegari <sdy at ucsd.edu> wrote:
>
>> Hi Alexandre, (and all)
>>
>> Attached is a pre Version 0.5 expr~.d_fat compiled on OSX 10.9.5 with
>> some fixes.  I have fixed a number of the bugs, which are listed on the
>> attached modified pd patch Alexandre sent me. I am still working on the
>> others, but I thought I send this intermediate version to you to test if
>> you had the time, before I pass the sources to Miller.
>>
>> I am not sure if I have picked the best way to fix the functions that
>> were supposed to receive one argument, but were listed as needing two, or
>> vice versa.  My impetus was to fix and drop the erroneous version which
>> would break any patch that has used them in the wrong format. I think it is
>> better to break the patches and inform the author of the new change. Most
>> likely, the original use did not behave as it should have any way, and it
>> is better to fix the patch.
>>
>> I would be happy to hear from any experiences.
>>
>> best,
>> Shahrokh
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 11:27 PM, Shahrokh Yadegari <sdy at ucsd.edu> wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks Alexandre. I will be in touch soon with new objects.
>>>
>>> best,
>>> Shahrokh
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 9:48 PM, Alexandre Torres Porres <
>>> porres at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> sure, count me in for testing it, my pleasure ;)
>>>>
>>>> I'm on a mac os - yosemite and mavericks
>>>>
>>>> cheers
>>>>
>>>> 2015-09-08 21:22 GMT-03:00 Shahrokh Yadegari <sdy at ucsd.edu>:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Alexandre,
>>>>>
>>>>> I recall that I fixed this bug a while back so I am surprised that I
>>>>> see it again.
>>>>>
>>>>> In any case your email is timely as I just started looking at the bugs
>>>>> and hope to be submitting new sources soon.
>>>>>
>>>>> Would you care to be my alpha tester? If so, what environment are you
>>>>> on? (mac, linux, sorry I cannot deal with windows)
>>>>>
>>>>> cheers,
>>>>> Shahrokh
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 1:12 PM, Alexandre Torres Porres <
>>>>> porres at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> So, as it seems, I just found that there's an issue with the way
>>>>>> [fexpr~] abbreviates the formulas and the way it behaves.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you use it like this [fexpr~ ($x + $x[-1] + $x[-2] + $x[-3]) *
>>>>>> 0.25] by supressing the outlet number, it won't check back on previous
>>>>>> block sample values.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> but if you do this [fexpr~ ($x1 + $x1[-1] + $x1[-2] + $x1[-3]) *
>>>>>> 0.25] it will!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> check attached patch
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Anyway, still seems like a bug to me one way or another that needs to
>>>>>> be fixed. And, as long as we're on the subject, how's the work on the
>>>>>> previous bug reports?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2015-09-08 1:47 GMT-03:00 Alexandre Torres Porres <porres at gmail.com>:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Shahrokh and Pd list
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I've been testing fexpr~ and it seems it won't get the previous
>>>>>>> samples from the previous block.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> For example, a simple mean filter like this:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [fexpr~ ($x + $x[-1]) * 0.5]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> will not work for the first sample of the block, because it won't
>>>>>>> get the last sample from the previous block.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So, I know that in practice it doesn't compromise much, it's just
>>>>>>> one sample, but in an 16 point average filter this becomes more of a
>>>>>>> concern. One way or another, even for just one sample, I consider this
>>>>>>> problematic and a bug, as it should always be able to address previous
>>>>>>> samples.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Am I right?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> thanks
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>> --
>> Shahrokh Yadegari
>> Professor of Composition and Sound Design,
>> Theatre and Dance Department
>> University of California, San Diego
>> Director, Initiative for Digital Exploration of Arts and Science, (IDEAS)
>> California Institute for Telecommunications and Information Technologies
>> (Calit2)
>> Email: sdy at ucsd.edu
>> Web: http://yadegari.org
>> Tel: (858) 822-4113
>> Fax: (858) 534-1080
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Pd-list at lists.iem.at mailing list
>> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
>> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
>>
>>
>


-- 
Shahrokh Yadegari
Professor of Composition and Sound Design,
Theatre and Dance Department
University of California, San Diego
Director, Initiative for Digital Exploration of Arts and Science, (IDEAS)
California Institute for Telecommunications and Information Technologies
(Calit2)
Email: sdy at ucsd.edu
Web: http://yadegari.org
Tel: (858) 822-4113
Fax: (858) 534-1080
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-list/attachments/20151119/a50ff013/attachment-0001.html>