Hi,
On 15 July 2015 at 11:57:17, katja (katjavetter@gmail.commailto:katjavetter@gmail.com) wrote:
Hi Jamie,
Thanks for your response. I cloned the repo to see the history, and noticed a tendency of simplification: FFTW replaced by Ooura, autotools build system replaced by makefiles. Nice! In fact the whole library looks much simpler than one would expect for the given functionality. Even the Pd and MaxMSP wrappers were amazingly small and simple files.
Thanks. It’s good to know my attempts to “keep it simple” are appreciated :)
For a library so systematic as LibXtract it makes sense to avoid wrapper code duplication. But will the extra complexity and overhead of Flext be justified in the case of these two wrapper externals plus corresponding makefiles?
Do you mean runtime overhead or maintenance overhead? I’ve never set out to measure the runtime overhead of Flext, but my impression is that it’s insignificant and certainly I’ve never noticed it. But if there is evidence suggesting otherwise, I’d be interested to know about it.
In terms of maintenance / build complexity, since commit 73bd8015 Flext is greatly simplified (through the use of C++ templates), requiring only a single header include; no more building and link static libraries! This means to support a flext external only two steps are needed: 1. add the Flext repository as a git submodule, 2. include flext.h
If the build system is your main concern, there may be a way to use a helper makefile like this for the Pd external and adapt (arguments for) it to build the MaxMSP version: https://github.com/pure-data/pd-lib-builder.
I guess my concern is that I’m planning to move _all_ of my externals over to Flext so I only have one API to think about. I would therefore need a compelling reason to make an exception.
BTW, I’m planning to support a wider range of F0 detection methods, including at some point your own Helmholtz algorithm.
best,
Jamie
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 2:21 PM, James Bullock James.Bullock@bcu.ac.uk wrote:
On 15 July 2015 at 11:57:17, katja (katjavetter@gmail.com) wrote:
...
For a library so systematic as LibXtract it makes sense to avoid wrapper code duplication. But will the extra complexity and overhead of Flext be justified in the case of these two wrapper externals plus corresponding makefiles?
Do you mean runtime overhead or maintenance overhead? I’ve never set out to measure the runtime overhead of Flext, but my impression is that it’s insignificant and certainly I’ve never noticed it. But if there is evidence suggesting otherwise, I’d be interested to know about it.
In terms of maintenance / build complexity, since commit 73bd8015 Flext is greatly simplified (through the use of C++ templates), requiring only a single header include; no more building and link static libraries! This means to support a flext external only two steps are needed: 1. add the Flext repository as a git submodule, 2. include flext.h
Ow, if Flext complexity is hidden from the user nowadays I eat my words (which were based on past experience).
BTW, I’m planning to support a wider range of F0 detection methods, including at some point your own Helmholtz algorithm.
Frankly I was thinking about how to split up routines in helmholtz~ such that it doesn't calculate a spectrum all for itself. That was exactly the reason I looked at the design of LibXtract. But the point with helmholtz~ is, I found that it needs to go back from autocorrelation function to spectrum for refinement calculations in the case of a high frequency fundamentals. The cascade approach would not work here, I have to puzzle a bit more.
Katja
Hi Jamie, would you consider having LibXtract available in the new Deken plugin?
That'd be great :)
2015-07-15 9:21 GMT-03:00 James Bullock James.Bullock@bcu.ac.uk:
Hi,
On 15 July 2015 at 11:57:17, katja (katjavetter@gmail.com) wrote:
Hi Jamie,
Thanks for your response. I cloned the repo to see the history, and noticed a tendency of simplification: FFTW replaced by Ooura, autotools build system replaced by makefiles. Nice! In fact the whole library looks much simpler than one would expect for the given functionality. Even the Pd and MaxMSP wrappers were amazingly small and simple files.
Thanks. It’s good to know my attempts to “keep it simple” are appreciated :)
For a library so systematic as LibXtract it makes sense to avoid wrapper code duplication. But will the extra complexity and overhead of Flext be justified in the case of these two wrapper externals plus corresponding makefiles?
Do you mean runtime overhead or maintenance overhead? I’ve never set out to measure the runtime overhead of Flext, but my impression is that it’s insignificant and certainly I’ve never noticed it. But if there is evidence suggesting otherwise, I’d be interested to know about it.
In terms of maintenance / build complexity, since commit 73bd8015 Flext is greatly simplified (through the use of C++ templates), requiring only a single header include; no more building and link static libraries! This means to support a flext external only two steps are needed: 1. add the Flext repository as a git submodule, 2. include flext.h
If the build system is your main concern, there may be a way to use a helper makefile like this for the Pd external and adapt (arguments for) it to build the MaxMSP version: https://github.com/pure-data/pd-lib-builder.
I guess my concern is that I’m planning to move _all_ of my externals over to Flext so I only have one API to think about. I would therefore need a compelling reason to make an exception.
BTW, I’m planning to support a wider range of F0 detection methods, including at some point your own Helmholtz algorithm.
best,
Jamie
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Hi Alex,
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 6:02 pm, Alexandre Torres Porres porres@gmail.com wrote: Hi Jamie, would you consider having LibXtract available in the new Deken plugin?
I haven't looked at Deken in detail yet, but in principle I'd like to make both LibXtract and ml.lib available this way.
Best,
Jamie
-
Alexandre Torres Porres -
James Bullock -
katja