On Oct 9, 2011, at 5:14 PM, katja wrote:
On Sun, Oct 9, 2011 at 9:43 PM, Hans-Christoph Steiner hans@at.or.at wrote:
Ok, I just tested the Mac OS X 64-bit build of Pd-double and it is indeed double precision. I say we start announcing it and spreading the word to get people testing it, and maybe fixing up their code and/or contributing to fixing things.
Katya, do you want to post such an announcement to pd-announce? I think we should also try to get it posted on the Create Digital Music blog. It would nice to have example patches of what double precision enables. I'll do one that uses 32-bit int timestamps.
Yeah it's now the right time to announce things and at the same time be clear about what to expect and what to not (yet) expect from pd double extended. Tomorrow I'll have time to do some detailed announcements. Could we collect tests patches somewhere? I have a lot of testpatches already in the original set on:
http://www.katjaas.nl/doubleprecision/doubleprecision.html (page bottom)
Most of these are functional tests and performance tests, but there's also a directory 'precision-tests' with examples, some of which are also shown on mentioned page.
I was thinking it would be nice to have examples of what double precision enables with audio. I guess its pretty subtle for the most part, but your examples are good on your site. I like the idea of Pd- double now becomes useful for general purpose math. And the IR measurement example is a good one too. Perhaps this doesn't really exist, but I was thinking it would be great to have a patch where you could hear the difference between single and double precision.
.hc
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
I spent 33 years and four months in active military service and during that period I spent most of my time as a high class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. - General Smedley Butler