As far as I recall, going between abstraction to parent patch via inlet~/outlet~ introduces a block delay, hence no error
> Third patch is like the second, only the effect has been moved out of the > abstraction, and into the parent patch. ONLY HERE do I get the DSP loop > error. Signal loop in a single patch without abstractions = error. Pd has no way to read and write to the same signal buffer in the patch at the same time *without* some tiny delay. > The point is the last two patches have (or should have) an identical graph! At the lower level, they don't. What happens if you put part of the path inside a subpath which uses inlet~/outlet~? > On Feb 25, 2020, at 11:36 AM, William Huston <[email protected]> wrote: > > First abstraction, simple stereo delay: 2 delay lines, variable feedback > L->R, R->L. > This works, no DSP loop error. > > Second abstraction contains an effect in the feedback path. (in my simple > example, it's just a null wire: In-L passes to Out-L, etc). Again this works, > no DSP error. > > Third patch is like the second, only the effect has been moved out of the > abstraction, and into the parent patch. ONLY HERE do I get the DSP loop > error. > > The point is the last two patches have (or should have) an identical graph! > > It really seems like a bug to me. > > I'll upload a test patch a little later. > > Thanks, > BH -------- Dan Wilcox @danomatika <http://twitter.com/danomatika> danomatika.com <http://danomatika.com/> robotcowboy.com <http://robotcowboy.com/>
_______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
