livio

I wonder if there's a way to increase the limit of elements of zl.

It seems that most modes are set to 256 elements. Same thing for thresh.. and other list operators.

I thought about to use a one dimension jit.matrix but this would mean to build a whole set of functions very useful in zl..

Hello!
I wonder if there's a way to increase the limit of elements of zl.
It seems that most modes are set to 256 elements. Same thing for thresh.. and other list operators.
I thought about to use a one dimension jit.matrix but this would mean to build a whole set of functions very useful in zl..
Thank you for any hints.
Best,
Livio


zl-limited-to-256-elements

no there is no way to increase the limit! You could only use jitter, as you suggested, or mxj and Java!

> no there is no way to increase the limit! You could only use 

> jitter, as you suggested, or mxj and Java!

There's already a collection of java objects similar to zl: [mxj 

list.*]. It's built in, and you have the sources if you want.

> no there is no way to increase the limit! You could only use  
> jitter, as you suggested, or mxj and Java!

There's already a collection of java objects similar to zl: [mxj  
list.*]. It's built in, and you have the sources if you want.

> > no there is no way to increase the limit! You could only use 

> > jitter, as you suggested, or mxj and Java!

> There's already a collection of java objects similar to zl: [mxj 

> list.*]. It's built in, and you have the sources if you want.

There's a tutorial (#43) on chopping up lists with java in the CNMAT Spectral Tutorials:

http://www.cnmat.berkeley.edu/MAX/downloads/

> On 22 juin 07, at 14:48, Gerald wrote:
>
> > no there is no way to increase the limit! You could only use  
> > jitter, as you suggested, or mxj and Java!
>
> There's already a collection of java objects similar to zl: [mxj  
> list.*]. It's built in, and you have the sources if you want.
>

About the last one "lists are limited - not the objects"... that means that even using java and mxj there's no way to a list longer then 256 elems?

Thanks everybody for every comment.
About the last one "lists are limited - not the objects"... that means that even using java and mxj there's no way to a list longer then 256 elems?


No, it means that Roman is wrong. A list has no inherent limit 

(except for memory allocation limits), although most objects which 

work with them do. I believe that the longest possible list in Max 

4.6 has 4094 elements. The vast majority of list-operations objects 

> About the last one "lists are limited - not the objects"... that 

> means that even using java and mxj there's no way to a list longer 

No, it means that Roman is wrong. A list has no inherent limit  
(except for memory allocation limits), although most objects which  
work with them do. I believe that the longest possible list in Max  
4.6 has 4094 elements. The vast majority of list-operations objects  
cap lists at 256 elements, though.

> Thanks everybody for every comment.
> About the last one "lists are limited - not the objects"... that  
> means that even using java and mxj there's no way to a list longer  
> then 256 elems?


Er, no. this has been discussed before, and afaik, the 256 limit is 

in the objects. Lists themselves can be longer, as per the mxj 

objects and some newer ones C ones. Im assuming the message object 

also has this limit, so if you prepend set a list that is greater 

than 256 elements the message object itself will probably clip it.

Anyway, messages themselves are not the issue. Objects that handle 

On Jun 22, 2007, at 3:30 PM, Roman Thilenius wrote:

Er, no. this has been discussed before, and afaik, the 256 limit is  
in the objects. Lists themselves can be longer, as per the mxj  
objects and some newer ones C ones. Im assuming the message object  
also has this limit, so if you prepend set a list that is greater  
than 256 elements the message object itself will probably clip it.

Anyway, messages themselves are not the issue. Objects that handle  
them impose length limitations.

> But, for sure, you cannot use a message box with 'set $1 $2 $3 $4 

but i bet its possible with java or with fortran

or with xhtml or whatever some people might use 

so i was wrong - thats bad for me, but good for max.

> But, for sure, you cannot use a message box with 'set $1 $2 $3 $4  
> [...] $512'... ;-)

but i bet its possible with java or with fortran
or with xhtml or whatever some people might use 
in their maxruntime. :)

> But, for sure, you cannot use a message box with 'set $1 $2 $3 $4 [...] 

While the sentence above is correct, as the $ notation is limited to 9, 

one might assume you mean you can't have 512 elements in a message box, 

but you can. You only proofed that prepend is limited as well. The limit 

for the message box in your example is 600, and only on the output, it 

will happily display more, but don't bang it!

And for storing it with the patch, it seems, the limit is at 250 

elements. (just look at the message box before banging the first time, I 

tried to store with 600 elements, but it stores only 250...)

It seems its related to the number of characters in the message box. If 

you fill it with higher numbers it will be less than 250 to store...

jln schrieb:
> But, for sure, you cannot use a message box with 'set $1 $2 $3 $4 [...] 
> $512'... ;-)

While the sentence above is correct, as the $ notation is limited to 9, 
one might assume you mean you can't have 512 elements in a message box, 
but you can. You only proofed that prepend is limited as well. The limit 
for the message box in your example is 600, and only on the output, it 
will happily display more, but don't bang it!
And for storing it with the patch, it seems, the limit is at 250 
elements. (just look at the message box before banging the first time, I 
tried to store with 600 elements, but it stores only 250...)
It seems its related to the number of characters in the message box. If 
you fill it with higher numbers it will be less than 250 to store...

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


There is no way to make zl deal with greater lists.

Jitter (there is an example dealing with greater lists somewhere in 

the the normal distribution), Java, JS, Jasch objects, probably more...

> I wonder if there's a way to increase the limit of elements of zl.

> It seems that most modes are set to 256 elements. Same thing for 

> I thought about to use a one dimension jit.matrix but this would 

> mean to build a whole set of functions very useful in zl..

Jitter (there is an example dealing with greater lists somewhere in  
the the normal distribution), Java, JS, Jasch objects, probably more...

>
> Hello!
> I wonder if there's a way to increase the limit of elements of zl.
> It seems that most modes are set to 256 elements. Same thing for  
> thresh.. and other list operators.
> I thought about to use a one dimension jit.matrix but this would  
> mean to build a whole set of functions very useful in zl..
> Thank you for any hints.
> Best,
> Livio
> --
> --
> oivil.eu


San Francisco, CA    Work: 857-544-3967

San Francisco, CA	Work: 857-544-3967
Email: bthrew@gmail.com
IM: captogreadmore (AIM)
http:/www.barrythrew.com


zl limited to 256 elements?