Re: [PD] Block staggering

2016-11-07 Thread Giulio Moro via Pd-list 
you may want to have a look at these recent discussions on this 
list:https://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-list/2016-10/116830.html
https://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-list/2016-09/116315.html

Giulio

 
  From: Matt Barber <brbrof...@gmail.com>
 To: PD-List <pd-l...@iem.at> 
 Sent: Monday, 7 November 2016, 16:52
 Subject: [PD] Block staggering
   
Hi list,
This must've come up before, but I can't find it on search.
Is there a reliable way to stagger large block computation so that the load is 
spread across ticks rather than spiking? Does it matter? I'm thinking of this 
classic configuration, where each block is calculated right before the X:

X X X X X X X X X X X X X  X   X   X   X   X   X    X   
    X       X        X               X

Rather than:
X
X X X X X X X X X X X X XX   X   X   X   X   X   XX       X       X       XX    
           X
___
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

[PD] Block staggering

2016-11-07 Thread Matt Barber 
Hi list,

This must've come up before, but I can't find it on search.

Is there a reliable way to stagger large block computation so that the load
is spread across ticks rather than spiking? Does it matter? I'm thinking of
this classic configuration, where each block is calculated right before the
X:


X
 X X X X X X X X X X X X
  X   X   X   X   X   X
X   X   X
X   X


Rather than:

X
X X X X X X X X X X X X X
X   X   X   X   X   X   X
X   X   X   X
X   X
___
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> 
https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list