[chuck-users] LiSa duration issue
dan trueman
dtrueman at Princeton.EDU
Wed Dec 30 14:00:09 EST 2009
> Two minor issues with LiSa.duration(). When we set the recording
> buffer to any size over 100::second a error will be given. However,
> the error won't make it clear it's coming from LiSa. In larger .ck
> files that also involve -for example- fft and the like it becomes a
> minor chore to detect the source of that warning message. This does
> not match the behaviour of other UGens and is generally inconvenient
> so I'd like to suggest pre-pending "LiSa; " to it. Though extremely
> minor I feel this is a issue.
fixed this and will commit to CVS.
> The second point is more subjective and open for debate. I feel that
> 100::second for the max duration made sense back when LiSa could
> only .record() but these days we can fill her memory using valueAt()
> and using longer buffers becomes practical. On top of that loading
> files straight into LiSa has been hinted at. Are there reasons to
> not extend this max to 10::minute or something in that order of
> magnitude? Would there be real issues with setting it to 1::hour and
> leaving people to shoot their own RAM-foot if and when they really
> wanted to? We allocate and free this memory properly, right? It is
> already possible to casually have ChucK blow your RAM out the window
> if you really wanted to;
funny, not sure why it's cutting you off at 100::second. it's
currently set to allow up to 1000 seconds (>16::minutes!), and that's
how it works with my chuck and mA. it may have been set to 100:second
for an earlier chuck, but i'm assuming you are at the current chuck, no?
best,
dan
>
> float foo[1000][1000][1000][1000]; //don't actually run this
>
> Yours,
> Kas.
> _______________________________________________
> chuck-users mailing list
> chuck-users at lists.cs.princeton.edu
> https://lists.cs.princeton.edu/mailman/listinfo/chuck-users
More information about the chuck-users
mailing list