[PD] firm delay scheduling

[Roman Haefeli]

On Tue, 2012-10-30 at 13:42 -0400, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
> [delay] is as firm as your going to get, from what I've seen.  [delay]
> should be at least as accurate to about one audio block, so like
> 1.5ms, so if you only need 250ms accuracy, you have plenty of room.

[delay] is not "somewhat precise", it is absolutely precise. However,
there are classes that ignore the precision of [delay] and treat
incoming messages as if they would have been sent at block boundaries.
For instance the phase inlets of [osc~] and [phasor~].

What Jean-Adrien probably means by 'elastic' is not the lack of
precision of [delay] in the deterministic scope of Pd, but the fact that
it tied to that deterministic scope and thus is precise only in logical
time, but not in real time. If the CPU load of Pd goes above 100%,
logical time gets more and more behind real time. 

Roman

> .hc
> 
> On Oct 30, 2012, at 1:13 PM, Jean-Marie Adrien wrote:
> 
> > Hello
> > I'm trying to launch security procedures in case of trouble, that will respond in less than 250 msec.
> > The fundamental question is :
> > 
> > Is there an object to schedule an event in the future with firm absolute delay ? 
> > 
> > {realtime} measures time AFTER the problem (no scheduling)
> > {del} schedules things but the delay is kind of elastic, depending on the CPU load.
> > 
> > thanks
> > JM
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Pd-list at iem.at mailing list
> > UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Pd-list at iem.at mailing list
> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list