Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
On May 26, 2009, at 1:52 PM, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
Yeah, I agree that the communications are a big part of it. Part of writing a custom GUI would be to write a simple communications to suit the needs at hand. But I think that the slowness in Pd's GUI is not even that much due to communications, but rather how the code is structured. For example, if you move on element in an array, instead of issuing a single Tk 'move' command, Pd deletes the whole array, then recreates it.
this is (among other things) what i mean by "busted communication".
And Dan, I also share your frustration with the common attitude on this list of "it is what it is". That's why I am working on re-writing the Pd GUI from scratch in pure Tcl with the aim of making it use Tcl/Tk is a clean and sensible manner (aka Pd-devel 0.41.4).
oh, i thought you wanted miller to include the code of Pd-devel...seems like you got off the track :-(
Um, how is this mutually exclusive? My motivation in working on pd-devel is unchanged.
it is mutually exclusive by what miller has said on this topic. i wish it wasn't
From what I gather, Miller is more or less game for including that work.
[...]
In particular, I want to structure the code around the idea of a communications API that uses Pd messages for both directions. For now, it will use the existing pd<-->pd-gui API, then the next step would be working on the C side of things once Miller has included it.
as far as i understand it, miller has stated several times explicitely that he is fine with re-structuring the tcl/tk code. however (and this is the crucial part), he is not going to accept any substantial changes to the C-part of it. hopefully this will change.
if i had more time, i would have started this myself several times...
fmasdr IOhannes