<html><body><div style="color:#000; background-color:#fff; font-family:HelveticaNeue, Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, Arial, Lucida Grande, sans-serif;font-size:16px"><div dir="ltr" id="yui_3_16_0_1_1422907840462_6506">Sounds like a good plan to me.</div><div id="yui_3_16_0_1_1422907840462_6517" dir="ltr"><br></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_1_1422907840462_6509" dir="ltr">-Jonathan<br></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_1_1422907840462_6507"><br></div><div class="qtdSeparateBR"><br><br></div><div style="display: block;" class="yahoo_quoted"> <div style="font-family: HelveticaNeue, Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, Arial, Lucida Grande, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;"> <div style="font-family: HelveticaNeue, Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, Arial, Lucida Grande, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;"> <div dir="ltr"> <font size="2" face="Arial"> On Monday, February 2, 2015 1:58 PM, Miller Puckette <msp@ucsd.edu> wrote:<br> </font> </div> <br><br> <div class="y_msg_container">More than that - I'm hoping to look at Katja's version and adopt the changes,<br clear="none">whether or not there turns out to be a set of formatted diffs available<br clear="none">anywhere...<br clear="none"><br clear="none">cheers<br clear="none">M<br clear="none"><br clear="none"><div class="yqt2058063909" id="yqtfd84702"><br clear="none">On Mon, Feb 02, 2015 at 06:34:54PM +0000, Jonathan Wilkes via Pd-list wrote:<br clear="none">> One other question: would you accept patches for Pd Vanilla that make it _possible_ to compile with t_float at double-precision (something Pd Vanilla cannot currently do)? That would give the Pd Vanilla user the option to compile to double-precision if they wish, which IIUC is the whole point of t_float in the first place. (Plus Vanilla users would get the small performance increase in the relevant tilde classes.)<br clear="none">> <br clear="none">> You'd still compile, distribute, and support Vanilla for t_float at single-precision. Same for external developers.<br clear="none">> <br clear="none">> -Jonathan On Monday, February 2, 2015 11:49 AM, Miller Puckette <<a href="" class="removed-link" shape="rect" ymailto="mailto:msp@ucsd.edu">msp@ucsd.edu</a>> wrote:<br clear="none">> <br clear="none">> <br clear="none">> What I've heard is that the 64-bit instruction set has wider bit fields<br clear="none">> for specifying registers, so that you can have many more of them. (The<br clear="none">> 386 had two or three I think; the 64 bit machines have dozens, depending<br clear="none">> how you count.) So one saves steps reading and writing to/from memory.<br clear="none">> <br clear="none">> OTOH, since all pointers have to be 64 bits, one uses more memory as a whole,<br clear="none">> perhaps by a factor of 1.5 or so - I don't see why, given that memory is<br clear="none">> "the main bottleneck" most of the time, this could possibly be consistent <br clear="none">> with 64-bit architectures being faster. So basically I don't understand<br clear="none">> what's really going on.<br clear="none">> <br clear="none">> cheers<br clear="none">> Miller<br clear="none">> <br clear="none">> On Mon, Feb 02, 2015 at 04:25:18PM +0000, Jonathan Wilkes wrote:<br clear="none">> > Hi Miller,What do you think is causing that performance increase on the version of Pd that is compiled for the 64-bit architecture?<br clear="none">> > -Jonathan</div><br clear="none">> > <br clear="none">> > <br clear="none">> <br clear="none">> <br clear="none">> <br clear="none"><br clear="none">> _______________________________________________<br clear="none">> <a href="" class="removed-link" shape="rect" ymailto="mailto:Pd-list@lists.iem.at">Pd-list@lists.iem.at</a> mailing list<br clear="none">> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> <a href="" class="removed-link" shape="rect" target="_blank">http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list</a><div class="yqt2058063909" id="yqtfd65261"><br clear="none"><br clear="none"></div><br><br></div> </div> </div> </div> </div></body></html>