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

Matt Barber brbrofsvl at gmail.com
Thu Nov 24 03:38:46 CET 2016

I think it's happening all at once in one block.

It's kind of a baroque way of doing it, however clever; an actual clear
method would be better, and a memset() call is fast and and among the least
controversial ways of zeroing a buffer.

On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 9:31 PM, Jonathan Wilkes <jancsika at yahoo.com> wrote:

> > Cyrille is doing it one go by exploiting the "bang" feature of switch~
> with an [until] loop to basically "fast forward" the zeroing process by
> however many blocks long the buffer is. It's really clever, and I don't
> think it screws anything up on the outside. This is a technique I'd never
> thought of, and I can imagine some interesting things coming from this
> (though I'm not sure it's a canonical technique or incidental). There are
> some things to think about, like whether the [inlet~] vector is cleared or
> if it just keeps the last 64 samples for each iteration of the [until] loop.
> I'm just talking in general about the idea of amortizing the cost of the
> operation
> across multiple blocks, which I assume is what's happening in his
> abstraction (or
> at least what's supposed to happen).
> Hm...
> In practice, how do you find Pd-l2ork's "clear" method compares to
> Cyrille's abstraction?
> -Jonathan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-list/attachments/20161123/90cc4c11/attachment.html>

More information about the Pd-list mailing list