[chuck-users] LiSa SndBuf rate bug?
signal.automatique at gmail.com
Fri Nov 14 23:26:18 EST 2008
2008/11/15 dan trueman <dtrueman at princeton.edu>
> the only problem is that YOU know more about all this stuff than some of us
> do. ;--}. i learned how to write:
> buf.samples()::samp => lisa.duration;
> from something you wrote...
That one looks nice& tight, doesn't it? The trick there is that the whole
"::" thing is simply a multiplication between a float/int and a duration...
and since functions like that one will return a int we can use it instead of
a int. You can build quite complicated expressions like that.
And thanks, I don't really think there is a "problem" because I'm happy to
share tricks. We'll need to share anyway because I think we're past the
point where any one single person knows everything there is to know about
ChucK. I know I went "WHAT?!!!" a few times when I saw some of the things
Spencer had handed to Mike, he was doing some sort of assignment within the
definition of the parameters to a function and I had to conclude I better
not touch that bit :¬).
I wouldn't rule out the possibility that all of the regular posters to this
list will know something that nobody else has realised yet, which brings us
> it would perhaps make sense for all the documentation to be wikified, so
> that everyone could contribute to making it more accurate and complete...
Yes, I think that would be a good idea for collaboration, but I don't think
it's a substitute for a good and clear examples directory. It would
definitely be a great method for creating a more extensive manual, because
of it's linear nature you can wonder whether it would be a good idea to go
into more advanced/exotic/specialised subjects in the .pdf but with a wiki
you could. Especially good bits could then be copied to the .pdf
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the chuck-users