On 10/05/2015 05:39 PM, Christof Ressi wrote: > You're right that it's easy to implement as an abstraction but I was rather > thinking about execution speed. > I guess a fictional object like [array drip] that would just iterate through > the array using a C loop would be the fastest possible method.
yes. well no: the fastest possible way would probably be hand-optimized assembler. > I don't see how you could even get close to that with abstractions, > especially when using only vanilla objects. i don't think that in practice this would matter though. an [array-drip]¹ implementation in Pd-vanilla should be O(n). an [array drip] implementation in C should be O(n). sure, the abstraction implementation will perform worse by a (constant) factor but the complexity stays the same which is the important part. i assume that the cases where you do need that extra speed boost are rather seldom, and do not warrant an extra built-in object. gfamrds IOhannes ¹ it always causes me pain to see the name "drip" used so widely.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
