John

Hello, I asked Joshua Kit Clayton about this behavior when Max 6.1 was released:

https://cycling74.com/forums/max-6-1-64-bit-number-rendering-issue/

Max seems to have some inconsistent behavior dealing with -1. It's becoming troublesome for and my clients using [hi] with a game controller whose output for certain input should be 1 0 or -1 but is sometimes 1 0 and....4294967295.

I have tried this on OSx 10.6.8 and gotten varied results. Some Max 6.1+ installations will show 4294967295 when that number is typed as an argument in [sel] or[message], others will transform that argument to -1 On 10.8.4 I think I always get -1. On Windows 7 Max seems to keep whatever is typed.

The output of [hi] is consistent on a machine, always putting out either -1 or 4294967295, but inconsistent across different OSx 10.6.8 machines. Since some Max installs turn the 4294967295 to -1 it's hard to work around. Here's an example:

Max 6.1+ 64bit
OSx 10.6.8, 10.8.4
Windows 7
Hello, I asked Joshua Kit Clayton about this behavior when Max 6.1 was released:
https://cycling74.com/forums/max-6-1-64-bit-number-rendering-issue/
Max seems to have some inconsistent behavior dealing with -1. It's becoming troublesome for and my clients using [hi] with a game controller whose output for certain input should be 1 0 or -1 but is sometimes 1 0 and....4294967295.
I have tried this on OSx 10.6.8 and gotten varied results. Some Max 6.1+ installations will show 4294967295 when that number is typed as an argument in [sel] or[message], others will transform that argument to -1 On 10.8.4 I think I always get -1. On Windows 7 Max seems to keep whatever is typed.
The output of [hi] is consistent on a machine, always putting out either -1 or 4294967295, but inconsistent across different OSx 10.6.8 machines. Since some Max installs turn the 4294967295 to -1 it's hard to work around. Here's an example:


1-representation-bug-in-max-6-1

Of course I just figured out a workaround for my purposes.

But this is still a bug related to 64 bit numbers, correct?

Of course I just figured out a workaround for my purposes.
But this is still a bug related to 64 bit numbers, correct?


-1 representation bug in Max 6.1+