I didn't know what MPI was, just had a quick check (only got the gist of
it). I'm learning a lot of things through Chuck. :) I think it would be
interesting, but might be a bit tricky to implement with chuck? I don't
know enough though, just wondering.
My approach might have been a bit clumsy. I had two situations to solve:
- Sending an array of primitives of an unknown length. This is
relatively easy to solve, adding all the args to the OscMessage in a loop.
- Sending a complex type that includes mixed primitive types. This was a
bit trickier, and some conversion needs to happen anyway when using time
or dur.
My (probably a bit inefficient) solution was to .stringify and
.destringify my objects (using Tokenizer), and then just sending a
string over OSC. It's a bit delicate/error prone, but it works, and once
I've added those methods to a class, it becomes quite easy to use, for
the actual communication. For instance, to transfer myObject would look
something like this:
// The sender. Sets up an OscOut, then:
oscOut.start("my/adress/pattern");
oscOut.add(myObject.stringify());
oscOut.send();
// The receiver. Gets an OscMsg, then:
if (oscMsg.address == "...") {
oscMsg.getString(0) => string stringifiedVersion;
MyClass.destringify(stringifiedVersion) @=> MyClass myObject;
}
I've also encapsulated the sender part into a method to be able to
simply write:
this.response("my/adress/pattern", myObject);
Is this a decent approach? The type conversion to/from string can be a
bit fiddly, but it seems to work. One thing I like is that complex types
composed of other complex types are easy to (de)stringify, calling their
children's methods.
In the spirit of doing things the "wrong" way... ;) (I like that!)
Gz
On 28.08.18 07:31, mike clemow wrote:
Hey that's great!
Do you think it's worth building a library and standard framework around
sending/receiving those types of messages over OSC? A sort of Chuck/OSC
version of Message Passing Interface. Or do you think that OSC is
general enough to do the job all by itself?
Curious what your learnings were!
Congrats!
-Mike
--
Michael Clemow
he/him/his
Artist/Composer/Sound Designer
http://michaelclemow.com <http://michaelclemow.com/>
On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 5:03 AM Gonzalo <gonz...@dense13.com
<mailto:gonz...@dense13.com>> wrote:
Quick wrap up of this thread. I did what Mike suggested, and it works
great, thanks for the pointers! It was a bit of work getting to
transfer
all the required data structures properly via OSC, but worth the
effort. :)
On 16.08.18 10:28, mike clemow wrote:
> Hey!
>
> Been a long time since I posted here. In the spirit of doing
things the
> "wrong" way (which is what we're all about, right? ;) You _might_
> consider architecting your app using two (or more) concurrent
instances
> of ChucK; one with your synthesis stuff, and one doing your heavy
> computation. The one doing the math could be set up to have a
local OSC
> API for sending the parameters in and your other code could just
wait on
> the response (advancing time in the main chuck instance, while the
> calculations are being done elsewhere). You would have to have some
> structure around the communications, but there are ways to make that
> easier with functors (paging Michael Heuer).
>
> The good thing about this is that you get to take advantage of your
> computer's multiple processors, since Chuck is single-threaded
(last I
> checked). Besides, if your calculations are that intense, what's
another
> couple of milliseconds for OSC communication? Plus, your
calculations
> might run faster this way... maybe.
>
> Or don't consider that because it's crazy. ;) Fwiw, I've
definitely run
> into applications that required multiple Chuck instances talking
to each
> other, although usually I'm trying to use multiple sound cards
> simultaneously. I've also abused named pipes in service of
> inter-application communications, although I really don't
recommend that.
>
> Best,
> Mike
>
> --
> Michael Clemow
> he/him/his
> Artist/Composer/Sound Designer
> http://michaelclemow.com <http://michaelclemow.com/>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 15, 2018 at 7:39 PM Gonzalo <gonz...@dense13.com
<mailto:gonz...@dense13.com>
> <mailto:gonz...@dense13.com <mailto:gonz...@dense13.com>>> wrote:
>
> I just did a quick test putting 1::samp all over the place
:), but so
> far no joy. But this is interesting, I'll explore it properly
when I
> have a bit more time. If I can locate where most of the time
gets used,
> I can focus on that. Thanks!
>
> Gonzalo
>
> On 16.08.18 01:36, Jack Atherton wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > Shreds block when you don’t advance time. If you don’t
advance time,
> > then ChucK assumes you need all the current computation
for the next
> > audio sample. Is there a place during your long
computation where
> you
> > could wait one sample every so often (1::samp => now;)? For
> example, in
> > the body of a loop.
> >
> > Jack
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 15, 2018 at 3:38 AM Gonzalo
<gonz...@dense13.com <mailto:gonz...@dense13.com>
> <mailto:gonz...@dense13.com <mailto:gonz...@dense13.com>>
> > <mailto:gonz...@dense13.com <mailto:gonz...@dense13.com>
<mailto:gonz...@dense13.com <mailto:gonz...@dense13.com>>>> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm working on a big project (www.whole-play.com
<http://www.whole-play.com>
> <http://www.whole-play.com>
> > <http://www.whole-play.com>), tons of classes, tons
> > of calculations happening at various points. My problem is
> that some of
> > these calculations take too long, up to a few seconds. I
> thought if I
> > run them in their own shred, the main shred would be
> unaffected, but
> > it's not the case, and the music stops during those
> processes. Maybe
> > I'm
> > doing something wrong. I can't post sample code
because it's many
> > classes interacting, but I thought maybe someone has
ideas on
> how to
> > tackle this issue?
> >
> > Thanks!
> > Gonzalo
> >
> >
> > --
> > http://dense13.com
> > http://www.whole-play.com
> > _______________________________________________
> > chuck-users mailing list
> > chuck-users@lists.cs.princeton.edu
<mailto:chuck-users@lists.cs.princeton.edu>
> <mailto:chuck-users@lists.cs.princeton.edu
<mailto:chuck-users@lists.cs.princeton.edu>>
> > <mailto:chuck-users@lists.cs.princeton.edu
<mailto:chuck-users@lists.cs.princeton.edu>
> <mailto:chuck-users@lists.cs.princeton.edu
<mailto:chuck-users@lists.cs.princeton.edu>>>
> > https://lists.cs.princeton.edu/mailman/listinfo/chuck-users
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > chuck-users mailing list
> > chuck-users@lists.cs.princeton.edu
<mailto:chuck-users@lists.cs.princeton.edu>
> <mailto:chuck-users@lists.cs.princeton.edu
<mailto:chuck-users@lists.cs.princeton.edu>>
> > https://lists.cs.princeton.edu/mailman/listinfo/chuck-users
> >
>
> --
> http://dense13.com
> http://www.whole-play.com
> _______________________________________________
> chuck-users mailing list
> chuck-users@lists.cs.princeton.edu
<mailto:chuck-users@lists.cs.princeton.edu>
> <mailto:chuck-users@lists.cs.princeton.edu
<mailto:chuck-users@lists.cs.princeton.edu>>
> https://lists.cs.princeton.edu/mailman/listinfo/chuck-users
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> chuck-users mailing list
> chuck-users@lists.cs.princeton.edu
<mailto:chuck-users@lists.cs.princeton.edu>
> https://lists.cs.princeton.edu/mailman/listinfo/chuck-users
>
--
http://dense13.com
http://www.whole-play.com
_______________________________________________
chuck-users mailing list
chuck-users@lists.cs.princeton.edu
<mailto:chuck-users@lists.cs.princeton.edu>
https://lists.cs.princeton.edu/mailman/listinfo/chuck-users
_______________________________________________
chuck-users mailing list
chuck-users@lists.cs.princeton.edu
https://lists.cs.princeton.edu/mailman/listinfo/chuck-users
--
http://dense13.com
http://www.whole-play.com
_______________________________________________
chuck-users mailing list
chuck-users@lists.cs.princeton.edu
https://lists.cs.princeton.edu/mailman/listinfo/chuck-users
