[PD] Re: Buffer Type Question

Stefan Turner stefan_turner at yahoo.co.uk
Sat Jul 31 16:11:52 CEST 2004

I agree with the general design idea that pd should
only provide the primitives so you do more useful
stuff yourself. The only reason I think freezable
delay lines should be implemented is because the data
is already there in buffer, so copying it somewhere
else is not too efficient, and not too pretty when you
then need to use vd~s _and_ tabread4~s (or whatever).
Freezing it should be free: you just need to _not_
increment read/write pointers and _not_ copy new data

Incidentally I notice that when you switch~ off a
subpatch with a delwrite~, the delread~ just outputs
some random stuff (I don't know what it actually is,
but it isn't anything that was in the delay line). As
an alternative, couldn't a switch~ed off delay line
just 'freeze'? I think this would be more 'correct' if
nothing else.

I promise this is the last time I mention this :). I
just think, admittedly as a fairly new user who knows
nothing about the inner workings, that there is too
much emphasis on making new externals when perhaps the
built-in stuff could be improved as well. It was just
a suggestion in any case.

Chris I think you might need to look at the t3 objects
in IEMlib which go faster than control rate (sort of)
if metro is getting you down. Also sample-and-hold
(samphold~ I think) is quite good for doing
control-type things at audio rate especially with a
phasor~. Good luck and keep up the good work everyone!


___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun!  http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com

More information about the Pd-list mailing list