2 Mar
2003
2 Mar
'03
7:05 p.m.
On Sat, 01 Mar 2003 03:03:37 +0000
Simon Jenkins <sjenkins(a)blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
Dave Griffiths wrote:
Nicely spotted, I hadn't noticed that one. The recursive sort algorithm
won't explore branches until it finds a leaf node. I can't think of a
elegant way to solve it, but I'm sure there is one. I'll have to leave
it for the moment though, as I'm trying to get a release ready and it's
sensitive code to be changing right now.
Surprising that no one had noticed it though, lags in the internal
latency are really noticable with the sequencing in ssm, especially when
you're writing fast music ;)
cheers,
dave
On Fri, 28 Feb 2003 19:05:19 +0100
David Olofson <david(a)olofson.net> wrote:
I just took a look at the SSM GraphSort code (from 0.2.1rc2). Its a
neat encapsulation but the sort algorithm
seems to mess up on an important case: On Friday 28 February 2003 09.20, torbenh(a)gmx.de
wrote:
[...]
random latency ? how do you mean that ?
Latency depends on how you happen to construct the net (order of
instantiation, connections etc) and/or the actual layout of the net, in "non-obvious" ways.
In ssm I sort the network each time a connection is made/destroyed,
and generate a ordered list of modules to process from the root up to
the leaves. It has to cope with circular sections, which unavoidably
introduce latency, but it works. It also automatically means
unconnected modules don't get processed, which is nice.