1 Mar
2003
1 Mar
'03
12:26 p.m.
On Sat, Mar 01, 2003 at 04:47:55PM +0000, Simon Jenkins wrote:
torbenh(a)gmx.de wrote:
but is the performance of push networks so much higher ?
[...]
Another problem i have with moving to the graph ordering side
is the opengl stuff in galan which requires the pull model for
the data.
It would get somewhat inconsistent if gl data was pulled and
audio data not... but this is also cosmetic...
They're not that far apart:
The point of graph-ordering is achieve pull semantics from a
push implementation. The graph orderer works out what order
the data would be pulled through the graph, and the data gets
pushed through in reverse order to achieve the same effect.
A push implementation with push semantics probably wouldn't
bother to sort the graph: it could rapidly calculate the execution
order at runtime, executing each node as its data became available.
OTOH I agree that there's an inconsistency at the implementation
level, if thats what you're concerned about.
well sort of... opengl is really pulled...
before some thing is rendered a transformation matrix needs to be pushed
onto the Matrix stack... popping it again when the subgraph connected to
the transformation component is done...
Simon Jenkins
(Bristol, UK)
--
torben Hohn
http://galan.sourceforge.net -- The graphical Audio language