Well, then I'm simply out of the loop and mostly-off base. Woops, sorry. I'll go there and see if we can keep it going. Looks like we're talking about both multi-threading and multi-instances which would be a big move towards solving some fundamental problems.
Also, it's not really a discussion any more, I turned it into a rant. :P In any case, I'd rather let my frustration be known and apologize later than sit by and *hope* for updates. In any case, if I can be helpful I'm more than willing to pitch in and get things done. On Feb 23, 2014, at 2:33 PM, Miller Puckette <m...@ucsd.edu> wrote: > Hi all - just a short note since this discussion is much too wode-ranging to > address in full... > >>> 2. Would the result of this work be accepted by Miller and become vanilla? >> >> As history has shown, the chances are limited. Again, there is probably a >> good way to do it where you could choose whether to use a single or >> multithreaded core but the real stakeholders are absent from the discussion. >> > > I think the main stakeholders are Pd users :) > > Anyhow, there's a useful discussion thread about pdlib instancing here: > > http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-dev/2013-12/019693.html > > and there's a wonderful series of talks underway at IRCAM about the problems > of real-time media computing in general: > > http://repmus.ircam.fr/mutant/rtmseminars > > cheers > Miller -------- Dan Wilcox @danomatika danomatika.com robotcowboy.com
_______________________________________________ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
