[Csnd] score s statement

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
6 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

[Csnd] score s statement

luis jure
i'm confused by the behaviour of the s statement in the score. the manual
page states:

"The first p-field time is optional and if present determines the end time
(length in beats) of the section. This time must be after the end of the
last event in the section otherwise it will have no effect."

that was true until 6.08, but as far as i can see, in 6.09 the time
duration in p1 will be *added after* the end of the last note in the
section.

thus, with this code:

i1 0 1
s2

i get a section with a duration of two seconds in 6.08, and of *three*
seconds in 6.09.

i agree that this behaviour could be more intuitive and more convenient
than the previous one, but in that case the manual page should be amended.
unless it's a bug or i failed to understand something.



--

Csound mailing list
[hidden email]
https://listserv.heanet.ie/cgi-bin/wa?A0=CSOUND
Send bugs reports to
        https://github.com/csound/csound/issues
Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [Csnd] follow-up: e statement

luis jure
i found another inconsistency in 6.09: the p1 value of the e event is
ignored altogether.

Csound mailing list
[hidden email]
https://listserv.heanet.ie/cgi-bin/wa?A0=CSOUND
Send bugs reports to
        https://github.com/csound/csound/issues
Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [Csnd] follow-up: e statement

Victor Lazzarini
P1 is ignored, P2 is action time. It’s been discussed and settled like this, as far as I know.
========================
Prof. Victor Lazzarini
Dean of Arts, Celtic Studies, and Philosophy,
Maynooth University,
Maynooth, Co Kildare, Ireland
Tel: 00 353 7086936
Fax: 00 353 1 7086952

> On 19 Jun 2017, at 14:38, luis jure <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> i found another inconsistency in 6.09: the p1 value of the e event is
> ignored altogether.
>
> Csound mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://listserv.heanet.ie/cgi-bin/wa?A0=CSOUND
> Send bugs reports to
>        https://github.com/csound/csound/issues
> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here


Csound mailing list
[hidden email]
https://listserv.heanet.ie/cgi-bin/wa?A0=CSOUND
Send bugs reports to
        https://github.com/csound/csound/issues
Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [Csnd] follow-up: e statement

luis jure
el 2017-06-19 a las 13:45 Victor Lazzarini escribió:

> P1 is ignored, P2 is action time.

yes, i know, and i tried both ways (e x and e 0 x). none of them work for
me with 6.09 (release). but never mind, i don't have this problem with a
build from recent git. also the problem with the duration of the section
is gone.

thanks, and sorry for the noise.

Csound mailing list
[hidden email]
https://listserv.heanet.ie/cgi-bin/wa?A0=CSOUND
Send bugs reports to
        https://github.com/csound/csound/issues
Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [Csnd] follow-up: e statement

Victor Lazzarini
Thanks, the two were probably related. As soon as we have the build for linux corrected, we will be preparing
a bugfix release.
========================
Prof. Victor Lazzarini
Dean of Arts, Celtic Studies, and Philosophy,
Maynooth University,
Maynooth, Co Kildare, Ireland
Tel: 00 353 7086936
Fax: 00 353 1 7086952

> On 19 Jun 2017, at 16:25, luis jure <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> el 2017-06-19 a las 13:45 Victor Lazzarini escribió:
>
>> P1 is ignored, P2 is action time.
>
> yes, i know, and i tried both ways (e x and e 0 x). none of them work for
> me with 6.09 (release). but never mind, i don't have this problem with a
> build from recent git. also the problem with the duration of the section
> is gone.
>
> thanks, and sorry for the noise.
>
> Csound mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://listserv.heanet.ie/cgi-bin/wa?A0=CSOUND
> Send bugs reports to
>        https://github.com/csound/csound/issues
> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here


Csound mailing list
[hidden email]
https://listserv.heanet.ie/cgi-bin/wa?A0=CSOUND
Send bugs reports to
        https://github.com/csound/csound/issues
Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [Csnd] follow-up: e statement

luis jure

el 2017-06-19 a las 15:27 Victor Lazzarini escribió:

> Thanks, the two were probably related. As soon as we have the build for
> linux corrected, we will be preparing a bugfix release.

thank you victor, that's great (sorry for the delay, i was hijacked by
life).

and since you're at it, could you check the attached csd? it illustrates
several problems i found with the r event in 6.09 (including the latest
git):

- in the first pass the tempo marking is ignored
- the duration of the section is also ignored for the repetitions
- in the last repetition the following lines are not correctly parsed and
  the orchestra generates noise.

(the csd works perfectly using 6.08.)

best,

lj


Csound mailing list
[hidden email]
https://listserv.heanet.ie/cgi-bin/wa?A0=CSOUND
Send bugs reports to
        https://github.com/csound/csound/issues
Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here

r.csd (454 bytes) Download Attachment
Loading...