Hi, Roman. I guess that fexpr~ implies block 1 but probably a few other
things too: 256 instantiations of the feedback loop in my abstractions are
around 44% load whereas the same number of [fexpr~ max($x1[0],
$y[-1]*$x2[0])] are peaking at 95%.

D


On 4 February 2018 at 12:33, Roman Haefeli <reduz...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Fre, 2018-02-02 at 18:31 +0000, Dario Sanfilippo wrote:
> > There's an implementation of a peak holder in this blog post: http://
> > dariosanfilippo.tumblr.com/post/162523174771/lookahead-limiting-in-
> > pure-data.
>
> BTW: the peak envelope part could be also implemented using fexpr~:
>
> [fexpr~ max($x1[0], ($y[-1]*$f2)]
>
> This has the advantage of not requiring a re-blocked subpatch with
> blocksize=1. However, I wonder which is computationally less expensive.
> Is there a rule of thumb whether [fexpr~] or [block~ 1] is faster?
>
> Roman
> _______________________________________________
> Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list
> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/
> listinfo/pd-list
>
>
_______________________________________________
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> 
https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Reply via email to