-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 11/26/2010 08:34 AM, Roman Haefeli wrote: > > Anyway, I think the solution would be to use 64bit float as the index.
true. > In 64-bit Pd, this isn't an issue anymore (or more correct: It will be > with _much_ larger tables). what do you mean by "64-bit Pd"? it _could_ mean 2 thing (for me): - - any (newish) Pd compiled on 64bit platform - - a Pd that uses 64bit (double-precision) floats for it's internal t_sample/t_float type, regardless of the architecture it runs on #1 is simply wrong, as all "proper" Pd's (that is, _not_ Pd-anywhere) use 32bit (single precision) float for numbers. so on my amd64 system, i still have the same issue #2 would be the solution, but even though i started double-ifying Pd some time ago, i haven't done anything in the last 2 years or so, which made the project stall. so Pd is not double-precision ready yet (i think it is still only the sound-generators like [phasor~] and [osc~] that are missing) masdr IOhannes -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkzvfjgACgkQkX2Xpv6ydvTMzgCfVKwuVYqCbZJFtKMnYbeW1dPk uCgAn0JH63AQddg6ZEbrHFp2y1PjGYQy =xqYd -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list