- chuck-dev - lists.cs.princeton.edu

fixed array compatibility checking (PATCH)
by Robin Haberkorn 08 Sep '12

08 Sep '12

Hi! Here's another minor bug fix. Consider this example: UGen @osc[2]; new SinOsc @=> osc[0]; new PulseOsc @=> osc[1]; It will work because the type checker will consider SinOsc/PulseOsc and UGen compatible for assignment (using the "isa" function which in turn is using the <= operator). This is because Chuck_Type "<=" will check that SinOsc is a child of UGen. However, unintuitively you cannot use the array constructor: [new SinOsc, new PulseOsc] @=> UGen @osc[]; Since the left-hand-side type (Osc[] in this case) is not considered compatible to UGen[]. Neither are they directly the same nor are they descended. That's because "<=" does not check for the arrays' "actual" types (Osc and UGen) being compatible. You must either declare the "osc" variable with the same type as the constructed array: [new SinOsc, new PulseOsc] @=> Osc @osc[]; or you have to cast the array members to UGen so the lhs type is (predictably) UGen[]: [new SinOsc $ UGen, new PulseOsc $ UGen] @=> UGen @osc[]; Both options are not very intuitive for the user. The "Osc" class/type is not even documented I think. Not to mention that it's not always easy to guess the type of a constructed Object array. The attached patch fixes that by allowing arrays of the same depth and derived "actual" types being considered compatible. I think this is the last array patch for the time being, though I'm tempted to implement support for map keys in the inline array constructor :-). Best regards, Robin

3 7

fixed multi array accesses (PATCH)
by Robin Haberkorn 04 Sep '12

04 Sep '12

Hi again, nice to see that ChucK development is moving on rapidly and will move to Github soon. Will send you pull requests then :-) Here's a patch that fixes multi array accesses involving map accesses. Previously a Chuck_Instr_Array_Access_Multi was emitted for every multi array access even though the instruction cannot handle map keys. Test case: string a[0][2]; new string[2] @=> a["foo"]; new string[2] @=> a["bar"]; "23" => a["foo"][0]; "24" => a["foo"][1]; "32" => a["bar"][0]; "42" => a["bar"][1]; for (0 => int i; i < 2; i++) <<< a["foo"][i], a["bar"][i] >>>; will die with an ArrayOutofBounds error. Workaround for version <= 1.3.0.2: string a[0][2]; new string[2] @=> a["foo"]; new string[2] @=> a["bar"]; "23" => (a["foo"])[0]; "24" => (a["foo"])[1]; "32" => (a["bar"])[0]; "42" => (a["bar"])[1]; for (0 => int i; i < 2; i++) <<< (a["foo"])[i], (a["bar"])[i] >>>; will result in both a map access and normal (int) access instruction. My patch revises the way access instructions are generated so the first test case works flawlessly. One can be applied on ChucK v1.3.0.2; the other one is an updated version of my 64-bit array patch (still using it until next release) and finally there's a version based on SVN trunk. Hope to contribute on a regular basis from now on. I do really want to use ChucK for my "music" project and I need it stable and a lot faster... Best regards, Robin

2 2

allowing string references to be declared (PATCH)
by Robin Haberkorn 04 Sep '12

04 Sep '12

Hi! This patch allows string references to be declared (should merge with v1.3.0.2 and SVN trunk). Seemingly works and allowed me to simplify some of my code involving static string members. Looking through chuck_scan.cpp, there are two more occasions where string references were disallowed but the checks have since been commented out. So I guess that this check has simply been overlooked. Best regards, Robin

1 0

64-bit patches (working!)
by Robin Haberkorn 03 Sep '12

03 Sep '12

Hi everyone, seeking to improve my ChucK setup's performance (and learning some more about the VM internals) I spent part of my weekend trying to get ChucK to compile as a 64-bit application. First I reapplied Steven Sinclair's patch posted some years ago on this list (fixing some other stuff along the way). Then I hacked together a fix for Chuck_Array usage. The patches are based on ChucK 1.3.0.2 and a Jack-support patch by me. I can elaborate on the Jack-patch as well as I think it's quite useful... Can rebase the patches on SVN trunk if necessary. I could also host my fork on Github if that helps. I was only testing with linux-jack and never experienced the realtime audio issues Steven initially described. Tested with some ChucK examples and the ChucK setup I'm working on. Most stuff appears to be working. The performance increase I achieved is significant! Some notes: * I don't like the way how integers must be machine-word-sized (yet alone because of frequent pointer-to-int casting). It'd better if the ChucK-internal datatypes are decoupled from the machine-word-size. When 64-bit support will be adopted people will run both 32-bit and 64-bit versions of ChucK. For the sake of ChucK script portability it would be nice if ChucK scripts ran with the same integer size on every machine. It should at least be possible to build a 32-bit ChucK using 64-bit ints or a 64-bit ChucK using 32-bit ints respectively. * The array patch is a hack really. I tried to fix the issue by turning Chuck_Array4 into a class for 1-word Chuck values, Chuck_Array8 for 2-word ChucK values, etc. This turned out to be a bad idea - because sometimes the array's actual C++ type matters and because sometimes a Chuck_Array e.g. for floats is used but the necessary Chuck_Array* type is machine-dependent (2-word floats vs. 1-word floats). Also, I find the Chuck_Array* implementation largely redundant and unnecessarily complex. I will try to revise Chuck_Array as a parameterized class that can be instantiated for every ChucK type. This should be much better. * Will also try to fix some array-related bugs in the process (bugs that also exist on 32-bit ChucK of course) Any thoughts, ideas, remarks? Please test the patches and send me ChucK test cases that cause trouble (but don't on 32-bit ChucK). I hope that these changes can go upstream soon after I got above issues resolved. Best regards, Robin

3 3

charAt, substring for strings
by Albert Wifstrand 26 Mar '12

26 Mar '12

Does ChucK have these? I know there's upper() and lower() for case conversion, are these (perhaps even along with a complete specification on ChucK strings) documented somewhere? I asked about this in the forum too, at http://electro-music.com/forum/topic-52680.html. Sorry about the cross-posting, but I'd also like to know if there's any activity here on chuck-dev, since there isn't much of that in the forum. Regards, -- Albert Wifstrand phone: (+46) 705 61 71 56 Skype: awifstrand www: http://www.wifstrand.se/albert

3 4

Rewriting audio wrapper for OpenSL ES
by Kenneth Stewart 12 Mar '12

12 Mar '12

Hi, I'm working on a senior design project where we're trying to explore porting ChucK to work on Android devices using the Android NDK. Currently we're working on rewriting some of the digiio_rtaudio wrapper to use OpenSL ES instead of the rtaudio functions. I was wondering if anyone could provide any advice or tips for doing this, or just let us know if we're heading down the wrong path. We think we've isolated the areas where rtaudio functions are used and want to substitute those calls for the right series of OpenSL functions, but figuring out what the appropriate mappings are between what OpenSL needs and what ChucK expects to connect to is taking a good bit of research. Are there any obvious pitfalls we should be aware of? Thank you for any advice in this area. Kenneth

2 1

ChucK GitHub
by Remi Gillig 14 Feb '12

14 Feb '12

Hello all, It's not that I don't like SVN but there are cool alternatives for open source projects now. So I put ChucK on GitHub, I dream that you would adopt this for future commits. The biggest advantage is the "fork + pull" mechanic where someone can fork a project, do some fixes, modifications, additions etc. and you can pull his changes into the original repository. I know changing SCM is a big change in a project but I had to go the mailing list archives to find the SVN URL and I would love to see more contributions to ChucK. Also a big change in many projects, is the change for the build system. For Windows, the platform I'm originally interested in, I saw that there were Visual 6 projects which is quite outdated. For the benefit of everyone, I made a preliminary CMake build file which can right now build ChucK on Visual Studio 2010 for example. CMake is a bit like make but can generate projects for a number of platforms. So, to summarize, I imported the SVN repository (revision 93) into GitHub at this address : https://github.com/speps/chuck My changes are already there, some minor fixes so that it builds on Windows (without HID, DirectInput support was outdated, without OTF server too. I did not want to be asked about Windows firewall for ChucK). These options should be CMake options if anyone is up for it. Anyway, I hope to hear from the developers community about a possible switch over to GitHub which would be great for ChucK (I had to go the mailing lists to realize that the latest version from the home page dates from around 2009). Cheers, Remi Gillig.

6 5

Re: [chuck-dev] chuck-dev Digest, Vol 59, Issue 1
by Remi Gillig 03 Feb '12

03 Feb '12

This is truly great to see that many people interested ! I agree that my own changes should not be in the main trunk but this is how I would have done it if I forked the main chuck github project if there was one. After that I could have made a pull request for my changes if the original repository maintainers wanted to integrate my changes. Anyway, this is all conditional and I would like some input from the current SVN committers (Spencer Salazar and Ge Wang) if they could be ready to make this change. Nowadays, all platforms supported by ChucK have decent Git support and using Git in combination with GitHub really can make wonders to an open source project like ChucK. I hope this message will reach them. In the meantime, I will try to keep my github in sync with the SVN one but I can't guarantee anything. As for contribution, if anyone is up for it, the current CMakeLists.txt file only supports Windows (because I don't have anything else setup) so it needs Linux and MacOSX support (at least with default options). And maybe later add support for compilation options (such as choose for HID support or not etc.). Again, thanks for the feedback ! Cheers, Remi Gillig. On 3 February 2012 15:29, <chuck-dev-request(a)lists.cs.princeton.edu> wrote: > Send chuck-dev mailing list submissions to > chuck-dev(a)lists.cs.princeton.edu > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://lists.cs.princeton.edu/mailman/listinfo/chuck-dev > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > chuck-dev-request(a)lists.cs.princeton.edu > > You can reach the person managing the list at > chuck-dev-owner(a)lists.cs.princeton.edu > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of chuck-dev digest..." > > Today's Topics: > > 1. ChucK GitHub (Remi Gillig) > 2. Re: ChucK GitHub (Colin Sullivan) > 3. Re: ChucK GitHub (Stephen Sinclair) > 4. Re: ChucK GitHub (Ricardo Fabbri) > 5. Re: ChucK GitHub (mike clemow) > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Remi Gillig <remigillig(a)gmail.com> > To: chuck-dev(a)lists.cs.princeton.edu > Cc: > Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2012 00:50:54 +0100 > Subject: [chuck-dev] ChucK GitHub > Hello all, > > It's not that I don't like SVN but there are cool alternatives for > open source projects now. So I put ChucK on GitHub, I dream that you > would adopt this for future commits. The biggest advantage is the > "fork + pull" mechanic where someone can fork a project, do some > fixes, modifications, additions etc. and you can pull his changes into > the original repository. I know changing SCM is a big change in a > project but I had to go the mailing list archives to find the SVN URL > and I would love to see more contributions to ChucK. > > Also a big change in many projects, is the change for the build > system. For Windows, the platform I'm originally interested in, I saw > that there were Visual 6 projects which is quite outdated. For the > benefit of everyone, I made a preliminary CMake build file which can > right now build ChucK on Visual Studio 2010 for example. CMake is a > bit like make but can generate projects for a number of platforms. > > So, to summarize, I imported the SVN repository (revision 93) into > GitHub at this address : https://github.com/speps/chuck > My changes are already there, some minor fixes so that it builds on > Windows (without HID, DirectInput support was outdated, without OTF > server too. I did not want to be asked about Windows firewall for > ChucK). These options should be CMake options if anyone is up for it. > > Anyway, I hope to hear from the developers community about a possible > switch over to GitHub which would be great for ChucK (I had to go the > mailing lists to realize that the latest version from the home page > dates from around 2009). > > Cheers, > Remi Gillig. > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Colin Sullivan <colinsul(a)gmail.com> > To: ChucK Developer Mailing List <chuck-dev(a)lists.cs.princeton.edu> > Cc: > Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2012 18:24:16 -0800 > Subject: Re: [chuck-dev] ChucK GitHub > I am in support of this idea, but I think it may be a better idea to keep the "master" branch representative of the official ChucK "trunk", and keep any other commits in other branches until they are merged into ChucK "officially". > > Just my two cents. > ---------- > Colin Sullivan > > > > On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 3:50 PM, Remi Gillig <remigillig(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Hello all, >> >> It's not that I don't like SVN but there are cool alternatives for >> open source projects now. So I put ChucK on GitHub, I dream that you >> would adopt this for future commits. The biggest advantage is the >> "fork + pull" mechanic where someone can fork a project, do some >> fixes, modifications, additions etc. and you can pull his changes into >> the original repository. I know changing SCM is a big change in a >> project but I had to go the mailing list archives to find the SVN URL >> and I would love to see more contributions to ChucK. >> >> Also a big change in many projects, is the change for the build >> system. For Windows, the platform I'm originally interested in, I saw >> that there were Visual 6 projects which is quite outdated. For the >> benefit of everyone, I made a preliminary CMake build file which can >> right now build ChucK on Visual Studio 2010 for example. CMake is a >> bit like make but can generate projects for a number of platforms. >> >> So, to summarize, I imported the SVN repository (revision 93) into >> GitHub at this address : https://github.com/speps/chuck >> My changes are already there, some minor fixes so that it builds on >> Windows (without HID, DirectInput support was outdated, without OTF >> server too. I did not want to be asked about Windows firewall for >> ChucK). These options should be CMake options if anyone is up for it. >> >> Anyway, I hope to hear from the developers community about a possible >> switch over to GitHub which would be great for ChucK (I had to go the >> mailing lists to realize that the latest version from the home page >> dates from around 2009). >> >> Cheers, >> Remi Gillig. >> _______________________________________________ >> chuck-dev mailing list >> chuck-dev(a)lists.cs.princeton.edu >> https://lists.cs.princeton.edu/mailman/listinfo/chuck-dev > > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Stephen Sinclair <radarsat1(a)gmail.com> > To: ChucK Developer Mailing List <chuck-dev(a)lists.cs.princeton.edu> > Cc: > Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2012 22:32:21 -0500 > Subject: Re: [chuck-dev] ChucK GitHub > I had tried doing that quite a long time ago ;) > > http://repo.or.cz/w/chuck-blob.git > > But lost interest in keeping it up to date.. I hope you have more > luck! Personally I think the project would benefit greatly by moving > completely to git. > > Steve > > On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 9:24 PM, Colin Sullivan <colinsul(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> I am in support of this idea, but I think it may be a better idea to keep >> the "master" branch representative of the official ChucK "trunk", and keep >> any other commits in other branches until they are merged into ChucK >> "officially". >> >> Just my two cents. >> ---------- >> Colin Sullivan >> >> >> >> On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 3:50 PM, Remi Gillig <remigillig(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> Hello all, >>> >>> It's not that I don't like SVN but there are cool alternatives for >>> open source projects now. So I put ChucK on GitHub, I dream that you >>> would adopt this for future commits. The biggest advantage is the >>> "fork + pull" mechanic where someone can fork a project, do some >>> fixes, modifications, additions etc. and you can pull his changes into >>> the original repository. I know changing SCM is a big change in a >>> project but I had to go the mailing list archives to find the SVN URL >>> and I would love to see more contributions to ChucK. >>> >>> Also a big change in many projects, is the change for the build >>> system. For Windows, the platform I'm originally interested in, I saw >>> that there were Visual 6 projects which is quite outdated. For the >>> benefit of everyone, I made a preliminary CMake build file which can >>> right now build ChucK on Visual Studio 2010 for example. CMake is a >>> bit like make but can generate projects for a number of platforms. >>> >>> So, to summarize, I imported the SVN repository (revision 93) into >>> GitHub at this address : https://github.com/speps/chuck >>> My changes are already there, some minor fixes so that it builds on >>> Windows (without HID, DirectInput support was outdated, without OTF >>> server too. I did not want to be asked about Windows firewall for >>> ChucK). These options should be CMake options if anyone is up for it. >>> >>> Anyway, I hope to hear from the developers community about a possible >>> switch over to GitHub which would be great for ChucK (I had to go the >>> mailing lists to realize that the latest version from the home page >>> dates from around 2009). >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Remi Gillig. >>> _______________________________________________ >>> chuck-dev mailing list >>> chuck-dev(a)lists.cs.princeton.edu >>> https://lists.cs.princeton.edu/mailman/listinfo/chuck-dev >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> chuck-dev mailing list >> chuck-dev(a)lists.cs.princeton.edu >> https://lists.cs.princeton.edu/mailman/listinfo/chuck-dev >> > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Ricardo Fabbri <rfabbri(a)gmail.com> > To: ChucK Developer Mailing List <chuck-dev(a)lists.cs.princeton.edu> > Cc: > Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2012 01:42:13 -0200 > Subject: Re: [chuck-dev] ChucK GitHub > +1 to Git. > > Ricardo Fabbri > -- > Linux registered user #175401 > www.lems.brown.edu/~rfabbri > pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPRJ > labmacambira.sf.net > > > > On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 1:32 AM, Stephen Sinclair <radarsat1(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> I had tried doing that quite a long time ago ;) >> >> http://repo.or.cz/w/chuck-blob.git >> >> But lost interest in keeping it up to date.. I hope you have more >> luck! Personally I think the project would benefit greatly by moving >> completely to git. >> >> Steve >> >> On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 9:24 PM, Colin Sullivan <colinsul(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> I am in support of this idea, but I think it may be a better idea to keep >>> the "master" branch representative of the official ChucK "trunk", and keep >>> any other commits in other branches until they are merged into ChucK >>> "officially". >>> >>> Just my two cents. >>> ---------- >>> Colin Sullivan >>> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 3:50 PM, Remi Gillig <remigillig(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hello all, >>>> >>>> It's not that I don't like SVN but there are cool alternatives for >>>> open source projects now. So I put ChucK on GitHub, I dream that you >>>> would adopt this for future commits. The biggest advantage is the >>>> "fork + pull" mechanic where someone can fork a project, do some >>>> fixes, modifications, additions etc. and you can pull his changes into >>>> the original repository. I know changing SCM is a big change in a >>>> project but I had to go the mailing list archives to find the SVN URL >>>> and I would love to see more contributions to ChucK. >>>> >>>> Also a big change in many projects, is the change for the build >>>> system. For Windows, the platform I'm originally interested in, I saw >>>> that there were Visual 6 projects which is quite outdated. For the >>>> benefit of everyone, I made a preliminary CMake build file which can >>>> right now build ChucK on Visual Studio 2010 for example. CMake is a >>>> bit like make but can generate projects for a number of platforms. >>>> >>>> So, to summarize, I imported the SVN repository (revision 93) into >>>> GitHub at this address : https://github.com/speps/chuck >>>> My changes are already there, some minor fixes so that it builds on >>>> Windows (without HID, DirectInput support was outdated, without OTF >>>> server too. I did not want to be asked about Windows firewall for >>>> ChucK). These options should be CMake options if anyone is up for it. >>>> >>>> Anyway, I hope to hear from the developers community about a possible >>>> switch over to GitHub which would be great for ChucK (I had to go the >>>> mailing lists to realize that the latest version from the home page >>>> dates from around 2009). >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Remi Gillig. >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> chuck-dev mailing list >>>> chuck-dev(a)lists.cs.princeton.edu >>>> https://lists.cs.princeton.edu/mailman/listinfo/chuck-dev >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> chuck-dev mailing list >>> chuck-dev(a)lists.cs.princeton.edu >>> https://lists.cs.princeton.edu/mailman/listinfo/chuck-dev >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> chuck-dev mailing list >> chuck-dev(a)lists.cs.princeton.edu >> https://lists.cs.princeton.edu/mailman/listinfo/chuck-dev > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: mike clemow <michaelclemow(a)gmail.com> > To: ChucK Developer Mailing List <chuck-dev(a)lists.cs.princeton.edu> > Cc: > Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2012 09:29:17 -0500 > Subject: Re: [chuck-dev] ChucK GitHub > I'll throw my hat in the ring for for git. > > I'm wondering how many users have personal changes to the main ChucK branch... I've dabbled in this realm before, but I'm curious what other changes people have made. > > //mike > > http://michaelclemow.com > http://semiotech.org > > > > > On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 10:42 PM, Ricardo Fabbri <rfabbri(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >> +1 to Git. >> >> Ricardo Fabbri >> -- >> Linux registered user #175401 >> www.lems.brown.edu/~rfabbri >> pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPRJ >> labmacambira.sf.net >> >> >> >> On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 1:32 AM, Stephen Sinclair <radarsat1(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> > I had tried doing that quite a long time ago ;) >> > >> > http://repo.or.cz/w/chuck-blob.git >> > >> > But lost interest in keeping it up to date.. I hope you have more >> > luck! Personally I think the project would benefit greatly by moving >> > completely to git. >> > >> > Steve >> > >> > On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 9:24 PM, Colin Sullivan <colinsul(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >> I am in support of this idea, but I think it may be a better idea to keep >> >> the "master" branch representative of the official ChucK "trunk", and keep >> >> any other commits in other branches until they are merged into ChucK >> >> "officially". >> >> >> >> Just my two cents. >> >> ---------- >> >> Colin Sullivan >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 3:50 PM, Remi Gillig <remigillig(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> Hello all, >> >>> >> >>> It's not that I don't like SVN but there are cool alternatives for >> >>> open source projects now. So I put ChucK on GitHub, I dream that you >> >>> would adopt this for future commits. The biggest advantage is the >> >>> "fork + pull" mechanic where someone can fork a project, do some >> >>> fixes, modifications, additions etc. and you can pull his changes into >> >>> the original repository. I know changing SCM is a big change in a >> >>> project but I had to go the mailing list archives to find the SVN URL >> >>> and I would love to see more contributions to ChucK. >> >>> >> >>> Also a big change in many projects, is the change for the build >> >>> system. For Windows, the platform I'm originally interested in, I saw >> >>> that there were Visual 6 projects which is quite outdated. For the >> >>> benefit of everyone, I made a preliminary CMake build file which can >> >>> right now build ChucK on Visual Studio 2010 for example. CMake is a >> >>> bit like make but can generate projects for a number of platforms. >> >>> >> >>> So, to summarize, I imported the SVN repository (revision 93) into >> >>> GitHub at this address : https://github.com/speps/chuck >> >>> My changes are already there, some minor fixes so that it builds on >> >>> Windows (without HID, DirectInput support was outdated, without OTF >> >>> server too. I did not want to be asked about Windows firewall for >> >>> ChucK). These options should be CMake options if anyone is up for it. >> >>> >> >>> Anyway, I hope to hear from the developers community about a possible >> >>> switch over to GitHub which would be great for ChucK (I had to go the >> >>> mailing lists to realize that the latest version from the home page >> >>> dates from around 2009). >> >>> >> >>> Cheers, >> >>> Remi Gillig. >> >>> _______________________________________________ >> >>> chuck-dev mailing list >> >>> chuck-dev(a)lists.cs.princeton.edu >> >>> https://lists.cs.princeton.edu/mailman/listinfo/chuck-dev >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> chuck-dev mailing list >> >> chuck-dev(a)lists.cs.princeton.edu >> >> https://lists.cs.princeton.edu/mailman/listinfo/chuck-dev >> >> >> > _______________________________________________ >> > chuck-dev mailing list >> > chuck-dev(a)lists.cs.princeton.edu >> > https://lists.cs.princeton.edu/mailman/listinfo/chuck-dev >> _______________________________________________ >> chuck-dev mailing list >> chuck-dev(a)lists.cs.princeton.edu >> https://lists.cs.princeton.edu/mailman/listinfo/chuck-dev > > > > _______________________________________________ > chuck-dev mailing list > chuck-dev(a)lists.cs.princeton.edu > https://lists.cs.princeton.edu/mailman/listinfo/chuck-dev >

3 2

ChucK scm
by Matt Liberty 02 Nov '11

02 Nov '11

Hi, I've been looking at the source in the chuck tarball. I'm wondering if whatever SCM is used for ChucK is publicly available? I think I would like to contribute some minor changes but it makes most sense to do so based on the latest branch. Thanks, Matt

2 1

mini svn build error
by Kassen 21 Oct '11

21 Oct '11

Dear Spencer. I checked out the svn source for the mini, that went fine. Then; zach@Carillon:~/Chuck-dev/miniaudicle/src$ make linux-alsa make -f makefile.alsa make[1]: Entering directory `/home/zach/Chuck-dev/miniaudicle/src' gcc -D__LINUX_ALSA__ -D__LINUX__ -D__MA_WXWIDGETS__ `wx-config --cppflags` -O3 -c -fno-strict-aliasing -D__CK_SNDFILE_NATIVE__ -Ichuck -Iwxw -I/home/zach/Chuck-dev/miniaudicle/src miniAudicle.cpp miniAudicle.cpp: In member function ‘long unsigned int miniAudicle::start_vm()’: miniAudicle.cpp:869: warning: format ‘%i’ expects type ‘int’, but argument 3 has type ‘long int’ gcc -o wxw/mAParentFrame.o -D__LINUX_ALSA__ -D__LINUX__ -D__MA_WXWIDGETS__ `wx-config --cppflags` -O3 -c -fno-strict-aliasing -D__CK_SNDFILE_NATIVE__ -Ichuck -Iwxw -I/home/zach/Chuck-dev/miniaudicle/src wxw/mAParentFrame.cpp In file included from wxw/mAParentFrame.h:46, from wxw/mAParentFrame.cpp:43: wxw/mAPreferencesWindow.h:121: error: ISO C++ forbids declaration of ‘wxNotebook’ with no type wxw/mAPreferencesWindow.h:121: error: expected ‘;’ before ‘*’ token make[1]: *** [wxw/mAParentFrame.o] Error 1 make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/zach/Chuck-dev/miniaudicle/src' make: [linux-alsa] Error 2 (ignored) zach@Carillon:~/Chuck-dev/miniaudicle/src$ I have; libgtk 2.22.0 libwxgtk2.8-0 ...with mathching -dev libraries. That is good enough to build the normal download version g++ --version gives me; g++ (Ubuntu/Linaro 4.4.4-14ubuntu5) 4.4.5 I'd be happy to provide other info if needed. Yours, Kas.

3 3