lör 2007-11-03 klockan 12:31 -0400 skrev Stephen Sinclair:
"b.rate" above is probably just a single number but "my_filter.freq()" is a call to a more advanced function and running those, as we debated earlier in the topic, every sample will put a drain on the cpu and there I wonder how much cheaper a C++ implementation will be then a ChucK one.
[...]
But of course, that's not to say that these choices are arbitrary either... Obviously they are made to maximize efficiency. Chucking something at freq() would imply a great deal of extra calculations per sample.
Hey, guys, before you continue! If this were implemented, ChucK would also get a "control rate", and the CPU-load would be about the same as any other realtime audio (programming) app. The difference would be that you can choose to not use it. Gasten