> > Please anybody correct me if I am wrong, but I think _unless
> > there are
> > loops in the graph_ there is _always_ an order that ensures no added
> > latency, and finding out that order is all what dsp-graph computing
> > is
> > about!!! I always thought Pd would take care of that....
> > perhaps doesn't it??
>
> no. if you want to ensure the order of execution, [...]
Well, it does for direct wired connections obviously.
So my error was to think that a [send~]-[receive~] pair was the same as
an invisible wire.
Now the subpatch trick (btw thank you for pointing me to the
documentation resources about it) doesn't help at all for [send~] and
[receive~] does it? I mean it's applicable but if you can arrange the
send and receive into subpatches that you have to connect physically,
then you don't need the s~ and r~ in the first place...
So when you use send~s and receive~s, basically there's no way of
enforcing a correct execution order?!?
--
Matteo Sisti Sette
[email protected]
http://www.matteosistisette.com
_______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
