[PD] OSC limitations in Vanilla

João Pais jmmmpais at gmail.com
Sun Apr 18 13:03:06 CEST 2021

I think I had problems in the past for not having [routeOSC] and 
[packOSC] when sending/receiving from other software such as reaper, but 
I can't confirm anymore. Other softwares will work with mrpeach, but not 
necessarily with vanilla.

It's also convenient to use routeOSC for a cleaner patch structure, as 
it allows a route-style tree sorting.

> I asked this on the facebook group, thought I'd ask it here as well. 
> Who cannot be happy with vanilla's OSC support and still needs mrpeach 
> and stuff? I mean, really really need as in there's no way to deal 
> with such OSC tasks in Vanilla. Tell me what exactly please... I know 
> that it can happen and how, I just wanted examples in the real world, 
> and I also believe Vanilla is fine for most use cases.
> I just never use OSC as all I do is inside Pd anyway :)
> I see [netsend]/[netreceive] make [udpsend]/[udpreceive] obsolete 
> these days for OSC... but we also have [routeOSC] and [packOSC], and 
> in Vanilla's documentation we see this:  ~/no attempt is made here to 
> clearly distinguish between the OSC address (symbols) and the 
> following data, nor between blobs and lists of numbers - it is assumed 
> that you know what types the message should contain. You can 
> alternatively use the OSC objects from mrpeach which have more 
> features than these./~

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-list/attachments/20210418/b73ff8d3/attachment.htm>

More information about the Pd-list mailing list