[PD] [delwrite~], or "what Pd operations are/should be realtime?"

[katja]

On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 11:22 AM, Roman Haefeli <reduzent at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 2016-11-23 at 10:48 +0100, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
>> On 2016-11-22 17:29, Alexandre Torres Porres wrote:
>> >
>> > there is a clear method for the delay line in pd-l2ork,
>> > undocumented,
>> > but there, not sure how it is done,
>> implementing the "clear" is trivial.
>>
>> however, afaiu this is not the concern that miller has.
>> the concern is, that you are breaking some realtime assumptions
>> (deterministic, bound execution time), with *any* possible
>> implementation.
>
> This concern seems a bit arbitrary. Someone already brought up the
> 'const <number>' sent to array example, which is probably a similar
> operation and already exists. Also, I once found out that resizing
> arrays that are accessed by tilde objects causes a recalculation of the
> DSP graph and this leads to drop-outs, too (but might be only noticed
> when having a huge set of patches loaded so that the DSP graph is very
> big). Since I found out about this, I try to avoid resizing arrays
> altogether.
>
> Personally, I think a programming language shouldn't second-guess what
> is sensible for a programmer to do and what not. It should be up to the
> programmer whether they want to risk a drop-out or not.
>
> BTW, how can you implement a 'clear' method with abstractions?
>
> Roman
> _______________________________________________
> Pd-list at lists.iem.at mailing list
> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
>

Not vanilla, but I use a sound-on-sound looper with [cyclone/poke~]
writing into the buffers and [tabread4~] reading.

If [delwrite~] would have a 'const' or 'clear' method I would use that
instead, if only because [cyclone/poke~] doesn't have a
subnormals-eliminator.

By the way I haven't noticed problems when flushing large buffers
(over 1 million samples total) in this looper while other audio is
still running.

Katja