This even simpler code :
foo(x) = 5;
process = (foo ~ _) ;
Produces suboptimal code:
virtual void compute(int count, FAUSTFLOAT** inputs, FAUSTFLOAT** outputs)
{
FAUSTFLOAT* output0 = outputs[0];
for (int i = 0; (i < count); i = (i + 1)) {
int iRec0 = 5;
On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 11:35 AM, Kjetil Matheussen <
k.s.matheus...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Actually, Faust should have been able to convert
> m_a1/m_a2/m_a3/m_m0/m_m1/m_m2 into
> slow variables so that we would have avoided all the conditional code in
> the inner loop.
> I'll see if I can come up
On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 11:07 AM, Kjetil Matheussen <
k.s.matheus...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> If faust had known that "mode" doesn't change very often, it could
> probably have optimized a bit here.
> Or perhaps it would be more naturally to make one faust program for each
> mode.
>
Actually, Faust
Poing Imperatif was made for making it easier to convert C++ and similar
languages into Faust.
I made this Poing Imperatif program from your C++ code:
https://pastebin.com/DuVWvu7w
Poing Imperatif created this Faust code: https://pastebin.com/fX0nkaGJ
And finally Faust created this C++ code:
vi
