Re: [PD] Maybe I'm pushing dynamic object creation too far

2011-02-04 Thread Mathieu Bouchard
On Thu, 3 Feb 2011, Ed Kelly wrote: I suppose that's good, but I'm anxious now to sort out a 2D engine for PD. A 3D engine is a 2D engine as long as you don't use the z-axis. That's also why there is glVertex2 in addition to glVertex3, for example. I'm using an industrial digger with GEM, w

Re: [PD] Maybe I'm pushing dynamic object creation too far

2011-02-03 Thread Ed Kelly
> Did you really mean to reply in private ? Nope! Here it is! > > Dammit again - I'm using the second core of the machine for the live score, >dynamic object creation in GEM - but I see the > > new version of Inscore supports PD, so all my work over the last 6 months > > has > >been for nothi

Re: [PD] Maybe I'm pushing dynamic object creation too far

2011-02-03 Thread Ed Kelly
> > Only one at a time, but they are tables of perhaps 30 points. Then I > > copy > > > data from the input buffer into the table. > > In your situation I'd try to do everything that doesn't necessarily need > to happen in 0 logical time to extend to > 0 logical time. Unless you > really nee

Re: [PD] Maybe I'm pushing dynamic object creation too far

2011-02-03 Thread Mathieu Bouchard
On Wed, 2 Feb 2011, Ed Kelly wrote: Dammit again - I'm using the second core of the machine for the live score, dynamic object creation in GEM - but I see the new version of Inscore supports PD, so all my work over the last 6 months has been for nothing. Pah! Your tool surely has some advant

Re: [PD] Maybe I'm pushing dynamic object creation too far

2011-02-03 Thread Mathieu Bouchard
On Thu, 3 Feb 2011, Roman Haefeli wrote: In your situation I'd try to do everything that doesn't necessarily need to happen in 0 logical time to extend to > 0 logical time. Unless you really need the new tables immediately after the buffer was filled, I'd suggest to copy them over 'slowly'. BT

Re: [PD] Maybe I'm pushing dynamic object creation too far

2011-02-03 Thread Roman Haefeli
On Wed, 2011-02-02 at 23:25 +, Ed Kelly wrote: > > On 2011-02-02 01:00, Ed Kelly wrote: > > > > I get dropouts, regardless of the jack buffer size/buffers number. Is > > > this > > > because the dynamic creation of a new object interrupts the pd audio > > > stream? > >If > > > > > so, can

Re: [PD] Maybe I'm pushing dynamic object creation too far

2011-02-02 Thread Phil Stone
Ed, I don't know if anecdotal confirmation will help you here, or just make you more frustrated, but I've noticed that I get more dropouts using Jack as opposed to portaudio (OS X) for the exact same processor-load. This has caused me to switch back to portaudio. Does anybody have any idea wh

Re: [PD] Maybe I'm pushing dynamic object creation too far

2011-02-02 Thread Ed Kelly
> On 2011-02-02 01:00, Ed Kelly wrote: > > I get dropouts, regardless of the jack buffer size/buffers number. Is this > > because the dynamic creation of a new object interrupts the pd audio > > stream? >If > > > so, can this be alleviated - 1. is it a GUI problem (and will pd 0.43 fix > > it

Re: [PD] Maybe I'm pushing dynamic object creation too far

2011-02-02 Thread IOhannes m zmoelnig
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 2011-02-02 01:00, Ed Kelly wrote: > I get dropouts, regardless of the jack buffer size/buffers number. Is this > because the dynamic creation of a new object interrupts the pd audio stream? > If > so, can this be alleviated - 1. is it a GUI probl