benniy

i'm sorry for the abstract explanation – i'm hoping someone can follow and hint me in the right direction. i'm currently working on a sequencer that incorporates a large-ish amount of kind-of-redundant code / abstractions of which each operate on a fast stream of numbers (used for clocking the individual tracks of the sequencer) in a variety of ways.

an example: for each single track of my sequencer, this fast stream of numbers / clock is first divided, then modulated, then subtracted and then prepended by a fixed number. this process takes place in ~36 tracks (currently each as an abstraction) simultaneously with individual divisions, modulations, subtractions and prependals per track.

i have never used gen~ and don't really know anything about it, yet i have read (or may have misread) that it does these kind of "fast" calculations in a very efficient way. is it per se efficient / advisable to actually ever use gen~ in a non-dsp situation?

an example: for each single track of my sequencer, this fast stream of numbers / clock is first divided, then modulated, then subtracted and then prepended by a fixed number. this process takes place in ~36 tracks (currently each as an abstraction) simultaneously with individual divisions, modulations, subtractions and prependals per track. 

i have never used gen~ and don't really know anything about it, yet i have read (or may have misread) that it does these kind of "fast" calculations in a very efficient way. is it per se efficient / advisable to actually ever use gen~ in a non-dsp situation?


is-gen-advisable-for-my-non-dsp-operation

it makes things realy, really fast, it means at dsp rate. If you don't want as fast as dsp rate, it's not a good idea. If your data can be turned in a matrix you could try jit.gen or jit.pix... but it seems like catching a butterfly with a, i don't know, a net to catch a lot of fishes in the water for example

is gen~ advisable for my non-DSP operation?