4 Feb
2005
4 Feb
'05
9:36 p.m.
Hallo, Frank Barknecht hat gesagt: // Frank Barknecht wrote:
I would guess, that tabread4~ indeed is faster here, but I didn't do any benchmarking, which should be easy to do with an abstraction for each approach and copying it a lot of times using Pd's internal messages like in: [until 100]---[; pd-subpatch 10 10 my_test_abstraction(
As Johannes predicted, tabread4~ is WAY faster, as you can test yourself with the little benchmark patch attached. Using 15 objects, expr~ in this case already has 80% cpu on my good ol' Athlon 900MHz while tabread4~ using a 1027 element table is at about 18%.
Ciao
Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org__