Hi Carlos,On 8/22/06, Carlos Pita <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
One reason is to use operator syntax: buf1 = buf2 + buf3, instead of add(buf2,buf3, buf1). The other is to spare the final user (synth programmer) any buffer bookkeeping. I see.
My idea was to keep track of pooled buffers' reference cou
One reason is to use operator syntax: buf1 = buf2 + buf3, instead of add(buf2,buf3, buf1). The other is to spare the final user (synth programmer) any buffer bookkeeping. My idea was to keep track of pooled buffers' reference counts, so that those currently unused would have a refcount of 1 and co
On 8/22/06, Carlos Pita <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi! I'm writting a real time sound synthesis framework where processing units are interconnected via numpy arrays. These buffers are all the same size and type, so it would be easy and convenient pooling them in order to avoid excesive creation/des
On Tue, 22 Aug 2006 23:51:01 -0300 (ART)
Carlos Pita <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi! I'm writting a real time sound synthesis framework where processing units
> are interconnected via numpy arrays. These buffers are all the same size and
> type, so it would be easy and convenient pooling them
Hi! I'm writting a real time sound synthesis framework where processing units are interconnected via numpy arrays. These buffers are all the same size and type, so it would be easy and convenient pooling them in order to avoid excesive creation/destruction of arrays (consider that thousands of them
