Le 2012-02-16 à 01:06:00, Rich E a écrit :
I think it's something like a team developing on the same codebase; 2-3
people definitely gets the job done faster than 1, partly because it is
easy to discuss your work (or in computing, synchronize).
There are few parallels to be made from
So, trying to get back to the original goal of this post, how about using a
(uint)pd_context in lieu of static variables? :)
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 5:09 AM, Mathieu Bouchard ma...@artengine.cawrote:
Le 2012-02-14 à 11:14:00, Charles Henry a écrit :
The point of the original remark is that
On 2/13/12, Mathieu Bouchard ma...@artengine.ca wrote:
Do you understand what I say, or you just repeat what I was replying to ?
I thought I understood--was there something I missed? The point of
the original remark is that you always lose some of your potential
computing power when trying to
On 2/11/12, Mathieu Bouchard ma...@artengine.ca wrote:
Le 2012-01-26 à 14:45:00, Charles Henry a écrit :
When talking about cluster computing, I had someone once ask: Is that a
case where the whole is greater than the sum of its parts? It's less.
Always less.
Depends on how you count it.
Le 2012-02-13 à 21:15:00, Charles Henry a écrit :
On 2/11/12, Mathieu Bouchard ma...@artengine.ca wrote:
Depends on how you count it. You may also see it as a bunch of computers
in which 0 computer can do task T in time N, but they can join together to
form 1 (or more) computer(s) that can do
Le 2012-01-26 à 14:45:00, Charles Henry a écrit :
When talking about cluster computing, I had someone once ask: Is that a
case where the whole is greater than the sum of its parts? It's less.
Always less.
Depends on how you count it. You may also see it as a bunch of computers
in which 0
Le 2012-02-08 à 09:08:00, IOhannes m zmoelnig a écrit :
another reason is, that with accessor-functions you can more easily stay
binary compatible both backward and forward than with directly accessing
the struct.
Depends what you think can be changing in the future...
sure you can do
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 2012-02-08 00:36, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
I mean that this context could be accessed directly if there's no reason
to use accessors. But if locking has to be done before and after
accessing (some of) those members, then it's nice to have a
Le 2012-01-14 à 13:04:00, Miller Puckette a écrit :
The question I'd like to rais is this: would it suffice to make Pd
instances be per-thread?
This means I'd have to switch threads every time I want to send a message
to pd. In my app, I have a main thread, and I have a pd-audio thread. The
Le 2012-01-14 à 22:16:00, Peter Brinkmann a écrit :
* In many cases, the audio thread is beyond the control of the
programmer. For instance, if you want one Pd instance per JACK client,
or one Pd instance per audio unit in iOS, then you just register a
callback, and you have no real idea
Le 2012-01-16 à 09:43:00, IOhannes m zmoelnig a écrit :
what is wrong with eliminating all directly accessible globals from the
API (like pd_objectmaker) and provide accessor functions to get
(thread safe) access to them?
Or just structs. You'd have a t_pdglobal type containing all the
Le 2012-02-07 à 18:49:00, Mathieu Bouchard a écrit :
Sharing gensym is useful so that one can prepare lists and messages
without having to lock everytime. This can allow to run the audio thread
on one processor while cooking up a big list on the other processor.
Otherwise the non-audio thread
Le 2012-01-19 à 10:11:00, IOhannes m zmoelnig a écrit :
it seems like i was myself mixing instances and threading. indeed what i
would prefer was, if i could use gensym() from another thread in a safe
way. this has nothing to do with a global hashtable (and i don't see a
reason why multiple
I'm really happy to see this conversation.
On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 7:45 AM, Charles Henry czhe...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 5:32 PM, Peter Brinkmann
peter.brinkm...@googlemail.com wrote:
I don't think users have anything to gain from fine-grained control of
threads. That
I see the next important step as making the general cases easier to
handle. A per-thread context such as IOhannes and Peter describe above
seems like the best approach to allowing a program to run multiple
instances of pd in a much more predictable manner, while it still allows
for backwards
On Jan 25, 2012, at 6:32 PM, Peter Brinkmann wrote:
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 5:38 PM, Charles Henry czhe...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 11:46 AM, Peter Brinkmann
peter.brinkm...@googlemail.com wrote:
Hi Chuck,
Check out the early bits of this thread --- various use cases
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 5:32 PM, Peter Brinkmann
peter.brinkm...@googlemail.com wrote:
I don't think users have anything to gain from fine-grained control of
threads. That seems like an optimization hint that may or may not be
helpful, depending on a lot of factors that are not obvious and
On Sat, Jan 14, 2012 at 3:04 PM, Miller Puckette m...@ucsd.edu wrote:
To Pd dev -
For some time the good folks who brought us pdlib have been asking how
one could make it possible to run several instances of Pd in a single
address space.
Maybe I have on my audio-colored glasses--but that's
Hi Chuck,
Check out the early bits of this thread --- various use cases already came
up along the way:
http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-dev/2012-01/017992.html. The short
version is that libpd is being used in such a wide range of settings that
you can come up with legitimate use cases for
Le 2012-01-25 à 12:46:00, Peter Brinkmann a écrit :
Threading is an implementation detail that users shouldn't have to worry
about,
If you sweep threading under the carpet, it makes the carpet turns into an
evil mutant who will come back to eat you.
I warned you.
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 11:46 AM, Peter Brinkmann
peter.brinkm...@googlemail.com wrote:
Hi Chuck,
Check out the early bits of this thread --- various use cases already came
up along the way:
http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-dev/2012-01/017992.html. The short
version is that libpd is
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 5:38 PM, Charles Henry czhe...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 11:46 AM, Peter Brinkmann
peter.brinkm...@googlemail.com wrote:
Hi Chuck,
Check out the early bits of this thread --- various use cases already
came
up along the way:
Oops, I just realized that I sent my reply IOhannes and didn't cc pd-dev...
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 4:11 AM, IOhannes m zmoelnig zmoel...@iem.atwrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
right now, only #1 is possible at all and it takes some effort on the
thread host (the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 2012-01-19 07:09, Peter Brinkmann wrote:
On 2012-01-14 22:04, Miller Puckette wrote:
To do this I'd replace all globals like
what is wrong with eliminating all directly accessible globals from the
API (like pd_objectmaker) and provide accessor
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
i think there are 2 use cases for multi threading.
#1 access a single instance of (lib)pd from multiple threads
#2 allow multiple instances of (lib)pd to co-exist in global memory.
right now, only #1 is possible at all and it takes some effort on
To Pd dev -
For some time the good folks who brought us pdlib have been asking how
one could make it possible to run several instances of Pd in a single
address space.
The question I'd like to rais is this: would it suffice to make Pd instances
be per-thread? This could be done by going through
I don't really have a sense of other possible approaches and their
advantages/disadvantages. Couldn't this issue also be solved in the logic of
the code? A lot of the current global variables could easily be visible in each
thread, and still be fully functional. Things like sys_libdir and
Hi Miller,
Thanks for your message!
I'm afraid thread-local instances would be problematic from the point of
view of libpd:
* The most common structure of a libpd-based application involves two
threads, a GUI thread and an audio thread, where the GUI controls the Pd
engine by invoking libpd
Yikes... sounds like back to the drawing board.
The odd thing is, do make thread-local storage, the good C compiler
folks (and linker folks, etc) had to do all the work you'd need to make
a switch-all-my-static-storage-when-I-ask-you-to feature which would open
up all sorts of other ways to do
29 matches
Mail list logo
