Caio Barros escribió:
But, Matteo, if the patch
don't create objects dynamically It will always be limited by the number
of allocable objects, isn't it?
Yes of course. However, infinite does not exist in real life. There must
be a number that you can assume your number of objects never exceeds. In
any case, your number of (even dynamically created) objects will always
be limited to the number of objects that don't eat up your CPU and
memory. So you can have as many statically created objects as that: if
they are only switch~ed on when used, they won't consume CPU.
However I understand this would be a radical change in architecture for
your patch and if you get the dynamical solution working there's no
reason to change that.
But why again dynamic object creation is not officially supported? It
works fine in pd vanilla, wich was the one I used to build this patch,
but it does have some problems. Isn't it usefull?
I think it is because
A) it does not offer an enough elegant, clean, and complete interface
(by interface I mean the kind of messages you use to do it)
B) it allows you to do things that will hang (or maybe even crash?) Pd
It is a "low level" implementation feature (the creation of objects by
hand and the construction of patches when loaded are both implemented in
terms of messages that dynamically create objects) that is left
"exposed" to the user without (by now) all the needed safety mechanisms
(which would be very hard to implement and probably even to devise).
I don't think it's not considered useful: if it weren't, it would have
been "inhibited" (or not "exposed").
(sorry for the algebraic negations)
Anybody please correct me where I'm wrong.
--
Matteo Sisti Sette
matteosistise...@gmail.com
http://www.matteosistisette.com
_______________________________________________
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
