Display program name in a fader or monitor

areyes1038 wrote:Hey jojokrok,
2. A bank of switches with labels was my next option, but it crashes the editor

im labelling 12*8 pads with multilabels no problem. can we see your code thats causing the crash?
see below for a working example

from a quick test it looks like the maximum array size for strings is about 756 bytes (I can display upto 63 pads containing 12 characters each)

EDIT: in fact this is quite confusing, i can display 63 * 15 chars (945bytes), but only 51* 16 chars (816 bytes)

test.jzml.zip

Macciza wrote:Hi
Congrats on your solution rather than letting these things limit you - good effort . . .

Yes these were/are the limits to the hardware Lemur - 512k per project . .
Probably not noticed/got overlooked during the updated to a Liine product . . .
But I believe they are working on these various issues (filesize/arrays) for an update, due soonish . . .

I think there is a way around the 512k limit but it involves text-editing the jzml, but not as simple as a cut and paste . . .
You would need to paste stuff in the right spot and edit id numbers for objects etc etc - may end up a bit messy and only half work like it did for me . . .. . .

I'm just going to wait until after the first update or two - which should hopefully solve many of these 'teething' issues -
And I am hoping to see some completely new features before too long as well . . .

Cheers
MM

Thanks for the credit!
Noway I would like to mess with the jzml file. Got already enough headaches and quite some time away from the ultimate goal which is music. I'll hold back and wait for the updates.
However I was really disappointed to find out about the 512k limit. Was working too hard to get my templates done. Have to make a break for now.

Hi

st8 - max Array size seems to vary depending on where and how it is instantiated . . .?
As a created 'expression' it seems quite limited - max of 20'ish 8 char strings . . .
But in a script it seems that larger arrays can be written - max of 60'ish
But using the externally defined expression and joining them in a script ie {{GM1},{GM2}, etc allows me to make a 127 * 8 char array . . .

It seems that different limits apply in different places??
Expression limit - thought that this was tied to array size limit, but perhaps not . . .
Typed-in scripting limit -Larger than expression so perhaps not array size limit - is this perhaps line length limit? ' \ ' does not seem to work as line continuation . . .
'Assembled' array from ext. arrays - Limit? not sure but at least double the line length limit . . .

Somewhat confusing I must say - or am I overlooking/ignoring something? drawing wrong conclusions?
Hopefully thes figures will align better without these limits soon . . .

@Kraft - Try joining you ext arrays in your script

a={{GM},{GM2},{GM3},{GM4},{GM5},{GM6},{GM7}};
setexpression(Monitor, 'value',a[x*127]);

Hope that helps
MM

Hi All,

Its been a few days since I looked the post and seems like ppl have had some interesting solutions. I had an epiphany while working on a set today to a solution, so I thought I'd post my solution to the above said question, using a container that contains 134 text items that you can change, and the fader offsets the container, to allow you to move it around to the relevant text item. - feel free to change it up as you want, i just threw it together to show the idea.

It is kinda heavy on memory (due to the number of text items) - i'm up to 12% for just this item, so i dont know if its all that worth it especially if you already have a memory hungry patch, however its worth posting cause i think it shows some cool possibilities for ppl if they dont know the concept of moving a container around within a container, and maybe someone wants to use it.

Hope this helps someone,
Protocol

NamerFader.jzlib.zip

Hi

Interesting approach - Not sure that the multiple text objects is the best approach - particularly now that I think larger arrays are possible . . .
I also find the 'off/on' colors too similar to be able to quickly tell which one is selected . . .

Also, are you using the Jazz Editor to a Lemur, or Lemur Editor to an iPad? 12% in JazzEditor not a problem - project is only 2% in Lemur editor . . .

The move-and-size project in the library also shows some interesting ways of manipulating objects on screen . .

Cheers
MM

@Macciza

Also, are you using the Jazz Editor to a Lemur, or Lemur Editor to an iPad? 12% in JazzEditor not a problem - project is only 2% in Lemur editor . . .

Ya i was using JazzEditor. Interesting that LemurEditor use 2% while JazzEditor is 12%...
If larger arrays are possible then I totally agree that is the way to go. I will have to up my knowledge on arrays now
(always something to learn on this machine!)

Thanks,
protocol

Macciza wrote:Hi

@Kraft - Try joining you ext arrays in your script

a={{GM},{GM2},{GM3},{GM4},{GM5},{GM6},{GM7}};
setexpression(Monitor, 'value',a[x*127]);

Hope that helps
MM

I was trying to use the interlace function and everything got messed up in the new array.
I'll try the direct joint and see what happens.
Thanks.

kraftf wrote:

Macciza wrote:Hi

@Kraft - Try joining you ext arrays in your script

a={{GM},{GM2},{GM3},{GM4},{GM5},{GM6},{GM7}};
setexpression(Monitor, 'value',a[x*127]);

Hope that helps
MM

I was trying to use the interlace function and everything got messed up in the new array.
I'll try the direct joint and see what happens.
Thanks.

Yeap it works!!
Thanks so much Mazzica. I got rid of all those if clauses!
Lets see now if the Number of the expressions I am going to set is going to overflow.

Hi all,
There's a hard limit of 64 elements typed in lists in the script engine (i.e {a,b,c...}) at the moment. This will be raised in an upcoming update.
Also, the file size limit of 512kB per template will be raised.

Cheers,

Axel

Hi Axel

Thanks for that - Are you able to offer any insight into the different sizes that I was able to come up with mention in the post from 17th starting with - st8 - max Array size etc . . .
I was able to generate seemingly large arrays (127 names) by concatenation of arrays into an array - bit confused by the results I came up with - see post for details

Thanks - Looking forward to the update . . .

MM

As a created expression, there's a hard limit to the number of actual characters you can type in the text field, that's 256. Therefore you can't have a very long list as it won't get parsed past the 256th character.
As a script, there's a limit to the number of items enclosed in '{' '}' braces. That's 64.

Raising those two limits is on the todo list.

axel_liine wrote:As a created expression, there's a hard limit to the number of actual characters you can type in the text field, that's 256. Therefore you can't have a very long list as it won't get parsed past the 256th character.
As a script, there's a limit to the number of items enclosed in '{' '}' braces. That's 64.

Raising those two limits is on the todo list.

I don't understand this.
What do you mean by "actual" characters?Do you mean 256 characters per line. I've able to create lists that have 60 items(<64) with 650 characters.
What is the maximum character nymber per script?
I was able to have around 3500 characters per script.

Thanks for that,
Though if

As a script, there's a limit to the number of items enclosed in '{' '}' braces. That's 64.

why could I generate a final array ( from multiple arrays) of 127 items?
How is this happening -wouldn't the final array assignment cause array expansion and overflow the 64 limit ? Not that I want it to . . .

Just interested in knowing whats going on behind the scenes that allows the large array solution I found . . .

Cheers
MM

kraftf wrote:

axel_liine wrote:As a created expression, there's a hard limit to the number of actual characters you can type in the text field, that's 256. Therefore you can't have a very long list as it won't get parsed past the 256th character.
As a script, there's a limit to the number of items enclosed in '{' '}' braces. That's 64.

Raising those two limits is on the todo list.

I don't understand this.
What do you mean by "actual" characters?Do you mean 256 characters per line. I've able to create lists that have 60 items(<64) with 650 characters.
What is the maximum character nymber per script?
I was able to have around 3500 characters per script.

I'm not talking about the Multiline script window. I mean when editing an expression value, such as "friction" and "attraction" in the Behaviour panel, or any variable you created yourself using the "Create Expression" button.
The Multiline script doesn't have this 256 characters limit.

Macciza wrote:Thanks for that,
Though if

As a script, there's a limit to the number of items enclosed in '{' '}' braces. That's 64.

why could I generate a final array ( from multiple arrays) of 127 items?
How is this happening -wouldn't the final array assignment cause array expansion and overflow the 64 limit ? Not that I want it to . . .

Just interested in knowing whats going on behind the scenes that allows the large array solution I found . . .

Cheers
MM

The 64 element limit applies when the script engine analyzes what you typed in, i.e maximum 64 elements separated by commas. Internally lists can actually have more than 64 elements, as you found out with your workaround. This discrepancy will be fixed.

Hi,

I did not know that this treat is growing so big.

I want to thank all the people who give me more ideas. Thanks also to them who give me so much information and little scrips and especially Good explanation. It is learning by doing.

Thanks and have a nice day.

axel_liine wrote: I'm not talking about the Multiline script window. I mean when editing an expression value, such as "friction" and "attraction" in the Behaviour panel, or any variable you created yourself using the "Create Expression" button.
The Multiline script doesn't have this 256 characters limit.

OK thx, now I get it.

But what about the multiline script?What's the character number limit? It seems that above around 3500 chars the parser can't cope with it.

Maximum multiline script length is currently set at 4096 characters.
It's a good practice to split your script in different functions for maximum readibility. Just create a second script called "init" for instance, set its trigger to "Manual", and call it from another script with "init();"

axel_liine wrote:Maximum multiline script length is currently set at 4096 characters.
It's a good practice to split your script in different functions for maximum readibility. Just create a second script called "init" for instance, set its trigger to "Manual", and call it from another script with "init();"

Yes its fair enough, and that is actually what I am doing when using large string variables. But I had to find out through trial and error