[PD-dev] alignment of signal vectors

[Miller Puckette]

Well, there's currently no way to get signals on a guaranteed boundary, but
that's something I want to do in the future.  I also want to allow objects
to delay creating their input and output vectors (possibly avoiding promoting
scalars to vectors for efficiency, and also allowing obejcts to create and/or
deal with alternative vector sizes, for instance for multichannel signals).

I've also been looking at your polynomial cos~ approximations - I can't get them
to run as efficiently as you seem to be able to, and couldn't immediately
figure out if I needed to change compilers, or compile flags, or what.  But
that also is on the list :)

Miller

on it once and didn't go deeply into all the 
On Mon, Jul 02, 2018 at 10:04:09PM +0100, Claude Heiland-Allen wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Is there any guarantee about alignment of signal vector data?
> 
> If not, should there be, in the future?
> 
> Or should one conditionally `dsp_add()` their specific-alignment-needing
> kernels dependent on what the `dsp` method actually gets?
> 
> Context:
> 
> In some code unrelated to Pd, using GCC vector intrinsics (not CPU-specific)
> I got a near-2x speed boost by recompiling the same code to target a newer
> CPU, vs the binary compiled for an older CPU.
> 
> The old idea of compiling a machine-specific math~.pd_linux (or whatever) to
> speed up everything by overwriting internal objects is also on my mind.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Claude
> -- 
> https://mathr.co.uk
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Pd-dev mailing list
> Pd-dev at lists.iem.at
> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev