Nobody knows :(?

in case i get your question right, the answer is no.

if a poly~ patcher is turned off, you can consider the audio patchcords connected to it "cold".

i sometimes use 2 empty poly~ just to turn off a partial signal process.

-110

Sorry I think I haven't been clear enough what I meant was that the poly~ is being dynamicly changed to different patch files but they have a different amount of audio input / outputs. Now my idea was to just set the amount of inputs and outputs to a fixed maximum amount but would these signals still use cpu even if theyre not in use ?

If so how would I be able to mute seperate poly~ inputs and outputs instead of the whole poly~ patch.

you want to know if the unused patchcords coming from some iddle outlets of an active poly~ instance are using cpu, right ?

in this case i'm not sure, but i just tested and it seems that they send a 0. signal value. Though i'd very much like to have some more enlightenment, because i don't know if those 0. signals use cpu at all.

i tested and yes they are using cpu

now ofcourse my next question is how would i be able to avoid this ?

yeah you can make dummy inlets for the ones with less inputs, but the signal will run in that case.

you could use scripting to connect all the connections after replacing the subpatcher/bpatcher/poly~ but i think it is to much work. maybe there is a chance that you redesign your subpatchers so that they dont have a different amount of inputs?