Hallo, David Powers hat gesagt: // David Powers wrote:
What would be the comparitive efficiency, of keeping track of data with pyext and a simple Python script, versus creating a data structure to hold the data?
Many tasks that are annoying to do in Pure Data, take about two minutes to do in Python. At least for me.
It's no problem to use pyext for handling sequence data. I would probably do the actual sequencing, that is, the timed creation of events, outside pyext using [del], [pipe] and [metro] as usual. I would use pyext to hold and modify the "score" as a kind of [textfile] on steroids.
Your gain would be - besides simpler patches - that you don't need to pass so many messages around, as you can do a lot of stuff directly inside your pyext object. This can be especially handy for doing list operations which are quite common in sequencing. In Pd and with [list]-abs lists get unpacked and repacked all the time, which can be costly. In pyext you could just store lists or lists of lists or dictionaries of lists and output them after processing them inside Python.
I also used the PDContainers as textfile-replacements, however they lack the flexibility of pyext when it comes to modify the stored data without passing them through Pd's message flow, so if you want to achieve this, you should use pyext (or one of the other embedded languages like gridflow, Snd/Scheme, pf, k_cext etc.)
Ciao
Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org_ __goto10.org__