[PD] GEM pix_write bugs (timelapse)

IOhannes m zmoelnig zmoelnig at iem.at
Wed Apr 1 16:45:04 CEST 2009

IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
> Max wrote:
>> here is the same thing with pix_multiimage instead.
>> it will crash pd a little bit later than the version with pix_image.
> i guess it is crashing right after you try loading 1000000 images (or 
> so) into RAM.
> what do you expect?
> (if you look carefully, you might also notice that [pix_write] gradually 
> fills up your harddisk. this is no bug either ;-))
> or am i missing something obvious (it seems so, as i cannot reproduce 
> the memleak you report with [pix_image] either).

despite of my sarcasm: have you considered using [pix_buffer] rather 
than [pix_multiimage]; it is way more flexible.
(e.g. if all the images can fit into ram, you don't even need a harddisk)

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 3636 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-list/attachments/20090401/3ce000b6/attachment.bin>

More information about the Pd-list mailing list