[PD] Fwd: Variable number of objects?

Ingo ingo at miamiwave.com
Sun Oct 2 08:07:09 CEST 2011

Ok, it looks like I was misunderstanding the way how the [send] / [receive]
is working.

But then I am still wondering why I got a lot of performance boost after
replacing the [send] / [receive] with wired connections?


> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: pd-list-bounces at iem.at [mailto:pd-list-bounces at iem.at] Im Auftrag von
> IOhannes m zmölnig
> Gesendet: Samstag, 1. Oktober 2011 18:18
> An: pd-list at iem.at
> Betreff: Re: [PD] Fwd: Variable number of objects?
> Hash: SHA1
> On 10/01/2011 04:48 AM, Ingo wrote:
> > Every [receive] will have to check if any [send] message is meant to be
> for
> > this particular [receive]. It will have to check if the header of the
> [send]
> > matches the header of the [receive] until the first character doesn't
> match
> > anymore. Then it will abort checking and the next [receive] will start
> > checking, and so on ...
> > I can't see how this can be done without taxing the cpu.
> this is not how send/receive work in Pd.
> in general, Pd's messaging system works in a "push" manner, where data
> is pushed from one object to the next, rather than a "pull" manner,
> where an object requests a message from the previous one.
> therefore, [receive] need not care which [send]s are attached to it.
> then, [send] need not search for attached [receive]s either, because the
> send-symbol will maintain a linked list of all attached receivers.
> going through the linked list for dispatching a message is quite fast.
> gfdstm
> IOhannes
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
> p+oAoNqIIRG/oaeeD7Qjoi2mmgkNXcZV
> =Chc9
> _______________________________________________
> Pd-list at iem.at mailing list
> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

More information about the Pd-list mailing list