Forums > MaxMSP

jit.cellblock problems/bugs

September 28, 2008 | 11:52 am

1) jit.cellblock seems slow to respond in in-place edit mode especially when scrolling. i am using 600 columns though…but this probably isn’t particularly large. it works fine in all other selection modes…

if i open the patch below in with the jit.cellblock in in-place edit mode it crashes max unless i stick a deferlow in there.

2) i am having a problem populating 600 cells with incrementing values from uzi – anomolous values are inserted towards 600. this happens nearly every time but not always…

expected behaviour – cells in row 0 count from 0 to 600

actual behaviour – cells count from 0 to nearly 600 then the values become a bit random…

max 5 running on windows xp/1.66ghz dual core/2gb RAM

patch to demonstrate

– Pasted Max Patch, click to expand. –

September 29, 2008 | 3:56 am

Great demo patch.

The cells at the end aren’t random – they are values missing from
within the earlier count. Somehow, the set command is getting
confused in this case – I’ll have a look at it to see if I can track
the problem down. Thanks for the report!

[ddg]
Darwin Grosse

On Sep 28, 2008, at 5:52 AM, donovan sellings wrote:

>
> 1) jit.cellblock seems slow to respond in in-place edit mode
> especially when scrolling. i am using 600 columns though…but this
> probably isn’t particularly large. it works fine in all other
> selection modes…
>
> if i open the patch below in with the jit.cellblock in in-place edit
> mode it crashes max unless i stick a deferlow in there.
>
> 2) i am having a problem populating 600 cells with incrementing
> values from uzi – anomolous values are inserted towards 600. this
> happens nearly every time but not always…
>
> expected behaviour – cells in row 0 count from 0 to 600
>
> actual behaviour – cells count from 0 to nearly 600 then the values
> become a bit random…
>
>
>
> max 5 running on windows xp/1.66ghz dual core/2gb RAM


September 29, 2008 | 9:05 am

Darwin Grosse schrieb:
> The cells at the end aren’t random – they are values missing from within
> the earlier count. Somehow, the set command is getting confused in this
> case – I’ll have a look at it to see if I can track the problem down.
> Thanks for the report!

To add and aid: On my PPC Powerbook it is actually fine, I couldn’t
encounter this problem, maybe its an intel/multiprocessor issue…

Stefan


Stefan Tiedje————x——-
–_____———–|————–
–(_|_ —-|—–|—–()——-
– _|_)—-|—–()————–
———-()——–www.ccmix.com


Viewing 3 posts - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)