Hallo, Charles Henry hat gesagt: // Charles Henry wrote:

On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 7:46 PM, Miller Puckette mpuckett@imusic1.ucsd.edu wrote:

...

Gee, I forgot to document this one, sorry.

a turned-off switch~ can be used to single-step the DSP in a window by sinding it a bang message.  So you can "switch~ 2048" in a window, connect a tabplay~ to a tabwrite~ inside it, start them, then send the switch~ N/2048 bangs to copy N samples from one table to another.

I used to use a [bang~]->toggle->[switch~] construction to try to have one execution and then switch off. Thanks for the tip! I guess I won't need that one anymore.

I've been using this a lot recently as well, but I don't think, Miller's undocumented suggestion can replace this in all cases. One advantage of the bang~->switch~ approach is - I believe - that it gets rid of many function calls: You just let the CPU compute a set of, say 64 samples with basically one function call per object. But if you send 64 bangs instead, I think, the object get activated 64 time so you have 64 function calls which should be slower.

Is my reasoning correct?

Ciao

Frank

Just putting in my 2cents, but I've been using the bonus feature of being able to write an array's contents to a text file with a message and then read it back out to a different array with another message.

This is probably ok for my usage, since I have a project where I need to store *lots* of arrays in text files anway, but it's certainly a really easy solution in terms of code.

-Stephen

On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 5:37 PM, Frank Barknecht fbar@footils.org wrote:

Hallo, Frank Barknecht hat gesagt: // Frank Barknecht wrote:

...

I've been using this a lot recently as well, but I don't think, Miller's undocumented suggestion can replace this in all cases. One advantage of

the

...

bang~->switch~ approach is - I believe - that it gets rid of many

function

I meant to write "[bang~]->[0(->[switch~]" here.

Ciao

Frank

---

Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Stephen Lucas wrote:

I should have also added that I'm only using this functionality for relatively small arrays (500 values), and haven't tried using it for arrays which may be holding longish audio samples.

-Stephen

On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 11:56 PM, Stephen Lucas <s9lucas@gmail.com mailto:s9lucas@gmail.com> wrote:

Just putting in my 2cents, but I've been using the bonus feature
of being able to write an array's contents to a text file with a
message and then read it back out to a different array with
another message.

you could use soundfiler too using this approach. but it also has to allocate memory twice... i used this approach to exchange relatively big arrays (more than 50,000 values) between two instances of pd, using /dev/shm (or any ramdrive) which worked fine.

cheers, Martin

definitely not mine. it's gÃŒnther rabl's toolset, ported to Pd by thomas grrrill.

hey, all of us are austrians; no nationalism intended.

tut mir Leid, war zu faul, um herauszusuchen. nÀchstes Mal mache ich es
wieder falsch, aber nicht mit deinem Namen.

Why not [iem_tab] externals?

abraço glerm