I did some experimenting with this technique, and it seems it will be just fine. I'm not sure where I got the impression timer wouldn't be accurate enough, but I was obviously wrong ;)
-Ian
zmoelnig@iem.at wrote:
Zitiere Ian Smith-Heisters heisters@0x09.com:
Hi all,
I'm trying to resize an array after doing a tabwrite~ to it, like soundfiler can automatically. This seems to me to be a trivial thing to
do, but I can't figure out how to get the number of elapsed samples. I
considered using a [timer], but last time I used that it was extremely
innaccurate, especially with high system loads.
[timer] gets you the logical(!) time between 2 events in pd. this is exactly what you want!
i do not think that there is really an inaccuracy, probably the problem lies somewhere else ?
the only problem i can think of, is when you loose some ticks because of very high system load (but then you will get clicks and the time lost might be the smallest problem)
Would a combination of [realtime] and [samplerate~] be accurate? I guess
realtime measures the elapsed time viewed from the "world outside" (this is becoming relativistic); since you are not interacting with the world outside (apart from dac/adc which is ok) [realtime] might not be the way to go.
I shy away from deducing the number of elapsed samples, as I'd rather get the true number somehow--but this is the only way I can figure it out so far. Any tips?
you will never get below 64 samples in accuracy anyhow (no matter whether you try with [timer], [realtime], [time] or whatever
mfg.acew. IOhannes
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://iem.at/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pd-list