[PD] more help file suggestions for pd 0.47

Miller Puckette msp at ucsd.edu
Sun May 8 00:44:05 CEST 2016

I _think_ (but am not sure) that "%" works differently on different
CPU architectures.  


On Sat, May 07, 2016 at 06:27:33PM -0300, Alexandre Torres Porres wrote:
> 2016-05-07 14:53 GMT-03:00 Miller Puckette <msp at ucsd.edu>:
> > I put in a sentence to scare users away from "%".  Use "mod" instead :)
> >
> oh, but I can't see it, so you just did it now, right?
> I know they differ for negative values input, never knew why the reason..
> expr also has a "%" function that behaves in the same way as the [%]
> object, to make things more confusing, a "fmod" function in expr also
> behaves in the same was as "%", but for float arguments, and not like
> vanilla's [mod]
> in max, [%~] (or [modulo~]) will behave the same way as "fmod" in expr,
> that is modulo for float arguments, which is also in agreement to pd
> vanilla's % - only that pd's is for ints.
> With all that, what I mean to ask and say is that I can't see what's wrong
> with [%] - the odd one out seems to be [mod].
> what do you say?
> cheers

More information about the Pd-list mailing list