> have the [partconv~] object be created before the [table]?

I tried and have it working actually, not sure how it wouldn't work like I said

2015-07-19 16:55 GMT-03:00 IOhannes m zmölnig <zmoelnig@iem.at>:
On 07/19/2015 08:46 PM, Alexandre Torres Porres wrote:
> hi, what is so hard about initializing the object with a table? The
> [cycle~] object does that really well, for example.

it's very simple if the object can access the table-values directly when
needed.
e.g. [tabread] (we don't need to search for max-compat externals to have
a use-case...) will check whether a table exists directly before it
accesses it; [tabosc~] (that's [cycle~], ain't it?) and other
dsp-objects will check whether the table exists when DSP is turned on
(Pd guarantees that whenever a table appears or disappears the DSP is
re-started).

but some externals (including [partconv~]) are slightly different, as
they don't access the table-values directly.
rather they munge the data in the table into a local representation (in
the case of [partconv~] the data will be fft-transformed), which is
rather time-consuming.

i *guess* that even for [partconv~] it would be enough to not access the
table-data before the DSP is started.
this might need major refactoring though.

> And I don't see how it wouldn't work if the table had its contents saved,
> for example...

have the [partconv~] object be created before the [table]?

gfmrdsa
IOhannes


_______________________________________________
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list