On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 11:22 AM, Roman Haefeli reduzent@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, 2016-11-23 at 10:48 +0100, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
On 2016-11-22 17:29, Alexandre Torres Porres wrote:
there is a clear method for the delay line in pd-l2ork, undocumented, but there, not sure how it is done,
implementing the "clear" is trivial.
however, afaiu this is not the concern that miller has. the concern is, that you are breaking some realtime assumptions (deterministic, bound execution time), with *any* possible implementation.
This concern seems a bit arbitrary. Someone already brought up the 'const <number>' sent to array example, which is probably a similar operation and already exists. Also, I once found out that resizing arrays that are accessed by tilde objects causes a recalculation of the DSP graph and this leads to drop-outs, too (but might be only noticed when having a huge set of patches loaded so that the DSP graph is very big). Since I found out about this, I try to avoid resizing arrays altogether.
Personally, I think a programming language shouldn't second-guess what is sensible for a programmer to do and what not. It should be up to the programmer whether they want to risk a drop-out or not.
BTW, how can you implement a 'clear' method with abstractions?
Roman _______________________________________________ Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Not vanilla, but I use a sound-on-sound looper with [cyclone/poke~] writing into the buffers and [tabread4~] reading.
If [delwrite~] would have a 'const' or 'clear' method I would use that instead, if only because [cyclone/poke~] doesn't have a subnormals-eliminator.
By the way I haven't noticed problems when flushing large buffers (over 1 million samples total) in this looper while other audio is still running.
Katja