IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
Max wrote:here is the same thing with pix_multiimage instead. it will crash pd a little bit later than the version with pix_image.i guess it is crashing right after you try loading 1000000 images (or so) into RAM.what do you expect?(if you look carefully, you might also notice that [pix_write] gradually fills up your harddisk. this is no bug either ;-))or am i missing something obvious (it seems so, as i cannot reproduce the memleak you report with [pix_image] either).
despite of my sarcasm: have you considered using [pix_buffer] rather than [pix_multiimage]; it is way more flexible.
(e.g. if all the images can fit into ram, you don't even need a harddisk) fgamsrd IOhannes
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
