On Don, 2013-02-21 at 15:15 +0100, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote: > On 2013-02-21 14:41, Roman Haefeli wrote: > > On Don, 2013-02-21 at 14:13 +0100, Charles Goyard wrote: > >> Hey, that works. But, as you may have guessed, it's awfully slow > >> with a "large" textfile (about 3kb). I guess it's just the > >> message box that's slow to update. > > > > Actually, message boxes are pretty fast. Try hiding it in a > > non-visible subpatch so that it is not hogging the CPU by updating > > the graphic representation. > > that's why i usually use [list] for these kind of operations. > though in reality it might be slower than an (invisible) msgbox.
The problem with the list approach is that if you want to concatenate a stream of atoms to a list, you need to pass the whole list around on every iteration. When list grows huge, it's getting really slow. With a message box you can append atoms in place, without passing the whole list around. For list lengths >3000, the message box approach is probably several orders of magnitude faster. This whole topic has been discussed in detail back when Matju was still involved in the list. Roman _______________________________________________ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
