Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
Hi Jeff!
Jeff Kaiser wrote:
> this is a great idea and has been discussed between andrew pask and
> myself.......we just haven't sat down to do it yet...I'm going to get
> together with rick walker later this summer and will keep you all posted.
Cool. I guess as in all software the trickiest part is the specification
- what do we want? "More!" - when do we want it? "Later this summer!" I
would love to help out, perhaps draw up some suggestions, and I would
certainly be interested in any development I could do - Macro recorder,
anyone? :) If we do it right I know a few people who would be very
interested, I think - hello Kid Beyond! :)
> BTW, andreas...aren't you on the max list as well?....how many lists do
> you belong to? :-)
I'm "only" semi-active on three: LD, MusicBar on ampfea.org and the
MaxList now - I think the activity I'm showing there reflects that I
kind of *need* to interact with those guys in order to not get into bad
habits this early in my max-programming life. Anyway, I try to help out
whenever I can.
> (I just lurk there....those guys intimidate me...i'm no programmer)
Hehe, to those that don't know the max-list here is a little excerpt
from a currently running discussion (Which I, fyi, didn't get at all...):
Andreas
-----------------------------------------
[+ 1.] is float addition, but [+ #1.] is int addition if 1st argument of
abstraction is int. Too bad, isn't it?
Would that be a reasonable feature request?
-----------------------------------------
Two possible workarounds:
loadbang -> '#1' -> [+ 0.](right inlet)
loadbang -> [float #1] -> [+ 0.](right inlet)
-----------------------------------------
make the argument to #1 "1." or "2." as long as it has the '.' it will
become a float add. I just tested it, it works.
------------------------------------------
Thanks, I was wondering is there would be a way to avoid that. Or the more
compact [loadmess #1] ...
--------------------------------------------
etc...