Thanks Jean. The last, fundamental question: as you can see from the attached screenshot, I’ve selected START RECEIVE from the right-click menu of osc-receive, but, even if the box remains highlighted, group-in and the textfile receive some (few) messages only if I evaluate them… It seems they aren’t receiving a continuous stream of messages: am I doing something wrong?
Best,
Francesco
as far as I can see none of the boxes in your patch seem to be turned reactive (otherwise they would be highlighted).
that might be why they don’t react
it is possible also that an error occurred at processing an event: if the receive thread is crashed, you need to stop and restart receive
Dear Jean,
your guess was right: the receive thread crashed, and I didn’t restart receive. However, the problem isn’t (fully) solved, because, when the boxes are turned reactive and seem to function in the right way, textfile, even if is in “append” mode, collects only few lists and does not receive all the messages (as they are visualized with text-view): why? Moreover, I noticed that textfile cannot be turned reactive itself (see the screenshot): has it something to do with the problem?
Best,
Francesco
yes: if the textfile is not reactive then it will not evaluate when messages come in
(was that unclear in the little reactive explanation I gave?)
it is possible however that the textfile box can not turn reactive as other boxes do; this box is a little bit special.
I will have to add this in a future release of the lib. I’ll keep you posted.
Jean, I confirm that textfile cannot be turned reactive as other boxes do. That’s a big issue! I’m looking forward to see an update. Thanks for all.
Best,
Francesco
@ karim
About the pros and cons of using a data-stream like patch in OM: it would probably be possible to do what I am doing in Max but since I have built a bunch of lisp tools (cellular automata algorithms) it is easier for me to use OM. In general when it comes to list processing I find Max to be headache, first because I am used to the intuitiveness of LISP secondly because I think the zl or the coll objects are not so flexible (think for instance at the 256 limit in the number of elements, I know you can change those but still).
In particular I am doing a lot of list interpolations that are super easy in OM while I am would not be sure how to do them in Max. Of course someone who is very good at Max and was “raised” on it might think differently.
It is an interesting debate and we might want to open a new topic about it, no?
Michele
Michele,
Yes sure thing! I agree. My post was some kind POSITIVELY provocative.
Many users have been “wandering” from/to OM and Max. 2 basically very different language programing environment.
THey have in common , one great thing : The Visual programing.
In Max it is an absolute necessity. In Om, you could travel from code to Visual and vice a versa.
Nevertheless, my philosophy as a (veteran) user, is to use different tools where they are at their best.
But it seems, nowadays, we have this new post-modernist approach, ( i am not judging someoen, or something in particular - it’'s just a criticism of today’s praxis in computer music), and that is to put everything in one pretty box that we can “mess” with it.
By no means this should be considered a pure judgement, but rather a questionning .
THanx Michele, i think you understood my point.
Good Musing with music!
K