[PD] pd~ fifo flag and block delays

[Antoine Rousseau]

btw, would it be thinkable to add the possibility to run the pd~ subprocess
asynchronously?

Think of a subprocess running a large Gem patch, that would potentially
produce large CPU spikes;
you don't really care if this subprocess sometimes gets late, while you
absolutely need the calling process (aka audio) to be on time.

As for the interface, I guess asynchronous behavior could be automatically
enabled when ninsig=0 and noutsig=0?

Antoine


Le ven. 25 sept. 2020 à 12:43, Christof Ressi <info at christofressi.com> a
écrit :

> The "delay" setting is in ms, but the "-fifo" argument is in blocks.
> Note that the "delay" setting is only valid for the parent process. In
> the subprocess, all audio settings from the menu are ignored because the
> relevant settings are passed via the [pd~] object).
>
> Christof
>
> On 25.09.2020 04:56, Fede Camara Halac wrote:
> > 
> > Aha! Thanks for clarifying! One more question, while I'm at it. Is the
> "delay" setting in blocks like the -fifo argument?
> >
> > Thanks a lot!
> >
> > f
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Pd-list at lists.iem.at mailing list
> > UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pd-list at lists.iem.at mailing list
> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-list/attachments/20200925/0298d8dc/attachment.html>