[PD] [nbuntil]: an non-blocking [until] replacement

katja katjavetter at gmail.com
Mon Dec 17 16:18:17 CET 2012

On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 1:21 PM, Roman Haefeli <reduzent at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-12-17 at 11:56 +0100, katja wrote:
>> Cool, with [nbuntil] the workload is even spread over the cores!
> I don't think that [nbuntil] will help in making Pd use more than one
> core. Since [nbuntil] is just an abstraction, everything run "below" it
> is still part of the pd process/thread. For fully exploiting many cores,
> real threading is needed, I suppose.

You're right, your abstraction exploits threading which is already
done. When running [nbuntil-help] on OSX, I notice CPU increase for
both cores in Activity Monitor. But it is also the case with regular
[until] in the patch.

Following the principle in [nbuntil], it would be possible to make a
general abstraction for deferring subsequent tasks with low priority,
no? Let's say [defer], a variation on [pipe], but where delay is
proportional to CPU load. This could then be used in any straight
sequence of subpatches which do a substantial amount of operations



More information about the Pd-list mailing list