[PD-dev] [arraysize] in PD

pix pix at test.at
Wed Apr 30 13:24:40 CEST 2003

i think it's not so much a matter of arraysize being strictly _necessary_,
it's just that when you are throwing these floats around to keep track of
the array size yourself, it seems a little silly because you know that
this information is readily available inside pd. pd isn't doing any extra
work to keep track of the information arraysize is giving out, it's just
sitting there, without a decent interface to access it from patch-space.

on the otherhand, people should probably get out of the habit of resizing
arrays liberally, since it's a time consuming thing to do during
performance ;)


On Tue, 29 Apr 2003 13:09:20 +0200 (CEST)
guenter geiger <geiger at xdv.org> wrote:

> On Tue, 29 Apr 2003, Krzysztof Czaja wrote:
> > hi Guenter, Miller, and all,
> >
> > my vote goes for adding 'getsize <array-name>' message to
> > soundfiler.  The soundfiler outlet is used already just for that
> > -- reporting array size.  No need for a new object.
> Yes, thats why I wanted to take a look at the implementation.
> In normal conditions the arraysize should be known. ...
> just add a [float] to store it should be enough.
> But you never know, there might be some situations
> Guenter
> >
> > Krzysztof
> >
> > guenter geiger wrote:
> > ...
> >  > I can at least include arraysize in the CVS version if it is really
> >  > necessary, for the main distribution Miller has to decide.
> >
> _______________________________________________
> PD-dev mailing list
> PD-dev at iem.kug.ac.at
> http://iem.kug.ac.at/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pd-dev

More information about the Pd-dev mailing list