I don't use VASP much, because of some of its shortcomings. If those (see below) could be fixed I would learn how to do back flips just so I could express how happy I would be.
Thomas Grill wrote:
VASP. Do you use it for
- simple array math/transformation?
yes
- medium complex things like analysis or synthesis?
- complex work like algorithmic composition and the likes?
yes
- none of the above?
- something completely different?
Does it have to provide
- real-time response (like for interaction with DSP processing)?
yes!
- or not?
Do you predominantly use
- singular VASP objects?
- groups/whole subpatchers of interacting VASP objects?
usually small bunches of 3-8 VASP objects. a few bigger abstractions
I realized in my own work that it's very hard to express complex stuff as PD graphs, and also VASP has the problem of needing to lock arrays while working on them, which still isn't really implemented in PD (it is in the devel branch, but the future of this isn't clear either). The question is now whether i abandon the current PD object implementation of VASP and focus on the Python one, or think about a side-by-side solution of both systems, probably reducing the functionality of the current VASP implementation a bit. There's still time to decide since the Python array implementation hasn't been standardized yet.... Let me know what you think and if you care at all.
best greetings, Thomas
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://iem.at/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pd-list