Eric Scheirer wrote:
>"All known" bottlenecks would be a very long list.
Well done, somehow I seem to incite this kind of response more than I would
like (insert emoticon here)
>A major one you didn't mention is the possibility of block-processing
>the SAOL code much of the time.
(d)Oh, I hadn't realised this wasn't happening. I guess I'll have to do some
more research as to what saol constructs can't be block processed, is
feedback the only limiting factor?
Is the event scheduling granularity in saol sample accurate, or is it
limited to the krate like csound?
>This combined with (1)
>could easily give you a ten-fold speedup, I think.
Would you be for/against the mainline saolc codebase heading in that
direction? It seems that because the spec is set in stone (more or less),
saolc could be a suitable target for iterative refinement and optimisation -
a large amount of energy could be directed at making it more and more
efficient without having to worry about source code compatibility issues.
Ross.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed May 10 2000 - 12:15:33 EDT