Hello all,

I was trying to wrap my head around a bit of documentation about split ( <:
)  and merge ( >: ) operators.

I want to point out that the documentation for the split operator is
misleading and incorrect. I verified it with ChatGPT here:
https://chatgpt.com/share/693c44fe-3688-8004-a4ca-6a227aac7dd8

The documentation reads:











*Split CompositionThe split composition (e.g., A<:B) operator is used to
distribute the outputs of A to the inputs of B.For the operation to be
valid, the number of inputs of B must be a multiple of the number of
outputs of A:    outputs(A).k = inputs(B)Each input i of B is connected to
the output i mod k of A:    A[i mod k] → [i]B*


But, it should read as so:












*Split CompositionThe split composition (e.g., A<:B) operator is used to
distribute the outputs of A to the inputs of B.For the operation to be
valid, the number of inputs of B must be some multiple, k, of the number of
outputs of A:    outputs(A).k = inputs(B)Each input i of B is connected to
the output i mod m of A, where m is the number of outputs of A:    A[i mod
m] → [i]B*

*This gives the following output distributions chart, which intuitively
tracks if we have 2 outputs going to 8 inputs, as an example:*

i i mod m   A[...] → B[i]
*0* *0* *  A0 → B0*
*1* *1* *  A1 → B1*
*2  * *0* *  A0 → B2*
*3* *1* *  A1 → B3*
*4* *0* *  A0 → B4*
*5* *1* *  A1 → B5*
*6* *0* *  A0 → B6*
*7* *1* *  A1 → B7*
I think having this chart really goes a long way for illustrating what's
actually happening.

Similar documentation fixes are likely required for the merge operator.

Aaron Krister Johnson
Music, etc.:
https://soundcloud.com/aaron-krister-johnson
https://soundcloud.com/filtercreed
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC_utjGYbSizWE0dNyr0Vdmg
https://aaronkristerjohnson.bandcamp.com/
http://www.untwelve.org
Code:
https://github.com/akjmicro <http://www.untwelve.org>
_______________________________________________
Faudiostream-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/faudiostream-users

Reply via email to