On Oct 25, 2011, at 10:23 AM, Roman Haefeli wrote:
On Mon, 2011-10-24 at 22:11 +0200, katja wrote:
Hans, thanks for your comments
On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 7:35 PM, Hans-Christoph Steiner <[email protected]
> wrote:
That looks really good on many levels. :) I like the layout, I
hadn't
thought of standard deviation, that makes sense as long as we can
specify
"exact" as a possibility. My guess is that some of this stuff
should
produce the same bit sequence every time, but I could be wrong
there.
If you specify tolerance zero, that's exact. But we found that
tolerance is needed for different reasons:
- floats are stored as text by Pd, and differences between computed
and stored values occur because of the truncated stored floats
Wouldn't it make more sense to load the reference table from some
binary
format (like WAV file) instead of some textual (lossy)
representation in
order not to lose any precision?
Both, [writesf~] and [soundfiler], support WAV files with 32-float bit
resolution (according to their help patches).
That's a good idea, plus it should be easier to manage a .wav file for
the reference rather than having it stored in an array in a Pd patch.
That should make it possible to have 32-bit float tests that are bit-
accurate. I guess we'll still need a standard deviation for when
loading 32-bit floats into 64-bit double Pd.
.hc
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Looking at things from a more basic level, you can come up with a more
direct solution... It may sound small in theory, but it in practice,
it can change entire economies. - Amy Smith
_______________________________________________
Pd-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
