]]>
Try to use a counter to delay each message to send.
Statistics: Posted by senso — 13 Jul 2009, 16:20
]]>
a too long latency for final message, and i was trying this to save some cpu, all the tempo will cancel my cpu gain I guess...
arf, that would be so powerfull, but no pb, ill find a workaround, gonna try if possible control all from one mess.
thanks anyway..
Statistics: Posted by 23fx23 — 13 Jul 2009, 15:20
]]>
]]>
as an example:
let's say I got a subpach A, and another B, but not in the same parent patch.
if mode is 0 then inside subpatch A all wires should go from in directy to out, same inside subpatch B.
if mode is 1 then inside subpatch A all wires should go from in to out2, same inside subpatch B
actually either subpach A or B is correctly changing wires, not booth. Itried starting booth message
with SET_TARGET_PATCH SENDER_PATCH, or with their respective patch's names, from what I feel (what id like to confirm) is usine need to execute one message first, then when all operations are done, can send a new message, but in my case this would be complicate to creates such temporisations, so I wonder if there isn't another solution maybe... maybe It's possible to send the two message in one only, changing target subpatch at the middle of message, but not sure i can access a sub-sub-sub patch, gonna try, but if anyone has an idea, highly welcome
Statistics: Posted by 23fx23 — 13 Jul 2009, 14:29
]]>
]]>
Statistics: Posted by 23fx23 — 13 Jul 2009, 02:04
]]>
SET_TARGET_PATCH SENDER_PATCH
GET_VALUE 01 numout VAR
SET_VALUE test in VAR
Statistics: Posted by 23fx23 — 10 Jul 2009, 14:13
]]>