Hello list, I have a curiosity, let's say that I want to clone an abstraction that reroutes signals between the cloned instances.
We learn that if a send~ is sorted before the corresponding receive~ we get no latency, but if the receive~ is sorted before, it reads from the previous block, so we get by default 64 samples of latency
But how does this order work in the case of cloned abstractions? the abstractions with a bigger or smaller "index" would be sorted accordingly (from 0 to n), or is it somewhat random?
so if for example abstraction 0 sends to 1, that sends to 2, it would be 0 latency, but the opposite would be 128 samples?
so if for example abstraction 0 sends to 1, that sends to 2, it would be 0 latency, but the opposite would be 128 samples?
With the current implementation: yes.
Note that the processing order of cloned instances is not really specified, so in theory you shouldn't rely on it. In practice, I don't see a reason why it would change.
Christof
On 15.01.2022 02:56, José de Abreu wrote:
Hello list, I have a curiosity, let's say that I want to clone an abstraction that reroutes signals between the cloned instances.
We learn that if a send~ is sorted before the corresponding receive~ we get no latency, but if the receive~ is sorted before, it reads from the previous block, so we get by default 64 samples of latency
But how does this order work in the case of cloned abstractions? the abstractions with a bigger or smaller "index" would be sorted accordingly (from 0 to n), or is it somewhat random?
so if for example abstraction 0 sends to 1, that sends to 2, it would be 0 latency, but the opposite would be 128 samples?
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
-
Christof Ressi -
José de Abreu