[PD] abstraction penalty benchmarks

[András Murányi]

On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 5:27 AM, Miller Puckette <msp at ucsd.edu> wrote:

> Here's a guess - I think each copy of the abstraction binds itself to
> a symbol, "pd-<name>". Binding is fast bt unbinding is linear-time in the
> number of things bound to the symbol... ouch.
>
> There's a good reason to bind toplevels and named sub-patches to ther
> names,
> but I think there's little reason to do it for abstractions - perhaps I can
> take this out, but I'd have to leave it as an option for compatibility
> (ouch!)
>
> Miller


Hi Miller,

Just very generally BTW:
Do you mean binary compatibility or patch compatibility?
Either way, what are your thoughts about the possibility of a future Pd-1.0
which would break (some kind of) compatibility for the sake of
revolutionary progress?

András
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-list/attachments/20130809/0633ef82/attachment.htm>