Non-graphical function?

Sep 20, 2010 at 11:30am

Non-graphical function?

I’m working on a patch with lots of linear interpolation in different places, which I currently do with separate instances of ej.function.

But as I am adding more and more instances of ej.function (currently at 25, but this could well go towards 50), I’m starting to wonder if there is a more efficient way to do this interpolation? I don’t need the graphical display all the time, so the processor power required for this is wasted most of the time.

The difficulty is that I occasionally do want to edit the interpolation curves with the graphic interface, so it needs to be on call.

Any ideas?

#52401
Sep 20, 2010 at 2:23pm

[after some more searching...]

So basically I’m looking for a [funbuff] for floats.

#188399
Sep 20, 2010 at 4:05pm

You could also use buffers as tables and read values with peak~, so you have 32-bits float resolution instead the integer resolution of table/itable.

#188400
Sep 20, 2010 at 4:33pm

If using java is an option for you, you can have a look to mxj ej.fplay which was designed exactly for that.

#188401
Sep 20, 2010 at 4:38pm

I’d like to avoid using tables and buffers altogether, because all I do is linear interpolation with multiple points (input a value x, get an interpolated value y out). Funbuff can do that without table, unfortunately just with floats.
Though tables and buffers have less gui overhead, they (especially buffers) introduce other overhead and more processing to fill the buffer with interpolated values.

I’ll try out the fplay suggestion, thanks!

#188402
Sep 21, 2010 at 11:18am

(ignoring the spam..)

mxj ej.fplay is indeed exactly what I need!

However, I am not sure how to make it work with pattr(storage). The object itself doesn’t support pattr, so maybe I should make a construction where a list is stored with pattr and is injected into ej.fplay everytime a preset is loaded?
If I use textedit I can edit the list on the fly which is convenient, but it seems excessive to use textedit to store lists. Is there a better way?

#188404

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.