[PD] sanity check on workings of pd~

cyrille henry ch at chnry.net
Wed Apr 6 23:52:56 CEST 2016



Le 06/04/2016 23:42, Jonathan Wilkes via Pd-list a écrit :
>  > be also aware that communication between pd and pd~ is cpu hungry.
>
> Is this the overriding reason why someone would prefer running two
> instances of Pd manually and communicating over netsend/receive?
not really, since you can use netsend / netreceive between pd and pd~.

Running 2 instance of pd communicating with network socket is very different than using pd/pd~

since the 2 pd are not synchronized, the communication is not sample accurate. This is not a problem for most applications.
the good thing is that if one pd is locked, it will not lock the other.
i.e : the rendering will not cause dropout in the sound, but desynchronization may appear.

cheeers
c

>
> -Jonathan
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pd-list at lists.iem.at mailing list
> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
>



More information about the Pd-list mailing list