Le 17/03/2022 à 09:24, IOhannes m zmölnig a écrit :
On 3/17/22 08:58, cyrille henry wrote:
Notable limitations:
1. Every process needs to know/use the same size for shmem ID's.
is that a real limitation?
Do you have a practicable example where one need to share memory of different
size?
i don't think this is the problem that chuck is referring to.
afaiu, it's rather that the two processes need to have a priori knowledge of two
different "thingies" in order to share some memory (without bad surprises): the
ID and the size.
Things are like that because I copy code from your object "pix_share_read" and
"pix_share_write"!
from a UX pov the question is, why it's not possible to only have to share a single
"thingy" (the ID) and have the others be shared implicitly.
Yes, automatically sharing the memory size could be possible, and can be useful
in some situation.
Since I don't spend a lot's of time in pd currently, one should not expect a
new version soon. But I accept patch!
cheers
c
fmgdsaf
IOhannes
_______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
_______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
