Re: 64 bit and precision? - was Re: [sc-users] DiskIn loop trig ?

[blackrain <blackrain.sc@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 11/29/08, Scott Wilson <s.d.wilson.1@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > I dont quite agree.
> > I do undestand the overhead issues.
> > I know the lang is not made to deal with this.
> >
>
>  Huh?
>

if floats being 64 bit in the lang is the case your question, yes I am aware.
I believe ints are not? please correct me if I am wrong.

>
> >
> > I can understand to a point how wider words wont render an 'instant'
> > change of perception to most ppl and can see why changes to sample
> > rate will hands down beat a fine grain resolution (again, an instant
> > appreciation); Yet, it is the sum of some blocks of calcs of these
> > words that makes things seem (sound? =) fluid or gainy.
> > smoother cycles, a bit less jumpy gens.
> >
> >
>
>  As you read:
>
>
> >
> > > but
> > > IIRC the conclusion was that for the most part audible improvements were
> > > only seen in cases with feedback, which makes sense.
> > >
> >
>
>  You can find cases. The question is whether more overhead in all cases vs.
> improvement in some cases is worth it. I'm not trying to answer that just
> now.
>
>  S.

I will clarify and say I do *not* want a 64 bit server - most ppl
including myself are not hardware ready and I guess we have some time
to go there.
Yet, I see api's all over using internal higher resolutions - both for
floats and ints.

All I stated is how some SC UGens slip. Sorry they do.

perhaps the inclusion of an internal type (float64?) will aid the case.
yeah I know its tons of work.

cheers,

x

_______________________________________________
sc-users mailing list

info (subscription, etc.): http://www.beast.bham.ac.uk/research/sc_mailing_lists.shtml
archive: https://listarc.bham.ac.uk/marchives/sc-users/
search: https://listarc.bham.ac.uk/lists/sc-users/search/