[PD] thoughts about iemlib

Frank Barknecht barknech at ph-cip.uni-koeln.de
Tue Sep 11 10:52:16 CEST 2001

guenter geiger hat gesagt: // guenter geiger wrote:

> OK, the iemlib gui objects are part of pd now ...
> Most of you probably think that this is a good thing, and it may well
> be, at least for the time being.
> [...]
> 2) .. and this is more serious, adding more tcl/tk dependent code makes
>  it harder to write a more resource friedly GUI for pd, like Karls gtk
>  gui. I think one of the reasons Karl abandoned his gui project is 
>  because pd isn't really portable in this respect, and because he 
>  realized that emuating tcl/tk for that matter isn't the way to go.

I do think, that GUI objects for PD are good, as they make the patches more
accessible to the eyes. You can see the important parts in your pacth
better, if you build them with GUI objects. 

But OTOH I found, that the GUI objects have a really bad influence in PD's
performance. That might be due to TK. For example in my little GUI-intensive 
drummaschine I used 3*16 [bng]'s in three rows resembling the running LED's 
on some drumcomputers. I had to reduce these to 4 [bng]'s per row because my 
CPU couldn't handle another LED-row. Still the patch eats 40 percent more 
CPU resources than when it is run with -nogui.

If this performance loss could be avoided by using another GUI toolkit, I,
too, think it is dangerous to tie TCL/TK deeper into PD.

[and I don't think that putting the gui kinda outside of pd like in
gripd is a real solution to the problem]
                                                 __    __
 Frank Barknecht       ____ ______   ____ __ trip\ \  / /wire ______
                      / __// __  /__/ __// // __  \ \/ /  __ \\  ___\	
                     / /  / ____/  / /  / // ____// /\ \\  ___\\____ \	
                    /_/  /_____/  /_/  /_//_____// /  \ \\_____\\_____\
                                                /_/    \_\ 

More information about the Pd-list mailing list