Really at that point, you’d have to be asking youself if there is any way to use an external.
On Sunday, February 4, 2018, Dario Sanfilippo <sanfilippo.da...@gmail.com> wrote: > 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, > $y[-1]*$x2)] 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($x1, ($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 >> _______________________________________________ >> Pdfirstname.lastname@example.org mailing list >> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/li >> stinfo/pd-list >> >> >
_______________________________________________ Pdemail@example.com mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list