On Wed, 2016-11-23 at 10:48 +0100, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote: > On 2016-11-22 17:29, Alexandre Torres Porres wrote: > > > > there is a clear method for the delay line in pd-l2ork, > > undocumented, > > but there, not sure how it is done, > implementing the "clear" is trivial. > > however, afaiu this is not the concern that miller has. > the concern is, that you are breaking some realtime assumptions > (deterministic, bound execution time), with *any* possible > implementation.
This concern seems a bit arbitrary. Someone already brought up the 'const <number>' sent to array example, which is probably a similar operation and already exists. Also, I once found out that resizing arrays that are accessed by tilde objects causes a recalculation of the DSP graph and this leads to drop-outs, too (but might be only noticed when having a huge set of patches loaded so that the DSP graph is very big). Since I found out about this, I try to avoid resizing arrays altogether. Personally, I think a programming language shouldn't second-guess what is sensible for a programmer to do and what not. It should be up to the programmer whether they want to risk a drop-out or not. BTW, how can you implement a 'clear' method with abstractions? Roman
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
