Om-sample, list-elements, sequence

[jimmie]

Hi,
I’d like to report some issues with the om-sample and list-elements objects:

om-sample seems less accurate than the deprecated bpf-sample. I’ve noticed a few times that the former sometimes returns one sample less than what is asked for, whereas the latter seems more consistent. I’ve just tried both in a patch, and for 177 samples requested, the results are 176 vs. 177. But, strangely enough, there’s a difference with bpf-sample when we specify, or not, the min and max value (see images): when nil (default value), it’s the same error as om-sample, but if values are specified, then it’s more precise.

list-elements: we can add outlets, but not remove outlets.

sequence: we can add inlets and outlets one at a time, but when removing, they all go back to one, it cannot be one by one.

All best,
Jimmie

[haddad]

Dear Jimmie,

For case 1):

om-sample and bpf-sample exactly the same options:

You just need to open the optional inputs using ‘>’

The same as the list-element and sequence methods, you need to use the ‘<’ and ‘>’ keys for extra input/outputs.

Tell me if this works for you.

Best
K

[jimmie]

Dear Karim,

Thanks for this. It’s good to know that om-sample and bpd-sample are more accurate when having custom in and out values, instead of left to their defaults.

As for list-elements and sequence, you’re right, it works just fine if using > and <. What happened is that I was using alt → and ← (the arrow keys), which worked for adding inlets, but less so for removing them.

All resolved, thanks!
Best,
Jimmie