Re: [LAD] ANN: convoLV2 0.2

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: Fons Adriaensen <fons@...>
Cc: <linux-audio-dev@...>
Date: Sunday, October 21, 2012 - 5:36 pm

--=-d9af2thMoOCE5tedEzqa
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sun, 2012-10-21 at 11:38 +0000, Fons Adriaensen wrote:

> As shown above, in real life it will be much *less* reliable.

As *speculated* above. Things like this are shown by experiment, and
experiment only. If either of us wants to show that threads or
synchronous is better, the only way to do so is to actually load a
system with many such plugins and plot the results. There is a reason
parallel computing literature is full of such plots, and nobody cares
about performance arguments that lack them whatsoever. It's simple to
convincingly argue just about anything "would" be faster - and be wrong.
This is true even sequentially on modern architectures, and it's
*really* true when threads get involved.

More to the point though, your argument is convincing - and a straw man
(see below). More importantly, I don't care, and it was a mistake to
ever indulge it.

The point of this was to invent and implement a bunch of LV2 things,
including block length restrictions in general (something you are about
the only advocate of around here, ironically).

Perhaps convolving in this way is completely idiotic. Great, fine,
fantastic, DON'T CARE, because that is not the point. I never claimed
this plugin was the best way to do convolution (I explicitly did the
exact opposite), so stop arguing against nothing.

It's not the best convolver.
It's not the best way to convolve.
It's not the best way to use libzita-convolver.
It's not an IR.lv2 replacement.
It's not recommended for use, by anyone, at all, for anything.

It is a tech experiment. Get it?

> Both (1) and (2) are simply untrue, there is *no* relation at all between

As it happens you are using the exact same confusion of concepts to make
a straw man of my argument so you can subsequently burn it. You asked
what's wrong with threads, and I made some points about why *threads* in
plugins are undesirable, in general. I didn't even say anything about
partitioned convolution.

I also don't care, and didn't write that part. Yell at Robin instead.

-dr

--=-d9af2thMoOCE5tedEzqa
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
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=IXEV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--=-d9af2thMoOCE5tedEzqa--

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[LAD] ANN: convoLV2 0.2, David Robillard, (Sat Oct 20, 4:14 am)
Re: [LAD] ANN: convoLV2 0.2, Tom Szilagyi, (Sat Oct 20, 1:27 pm)
Re: [LAD] ANN: convoLV2 0.2, David Robillard, (Sat Oct 20, 6:39 pm)
Re: [LAD] ANN: convoLV2 0.2, Robin Gareus, (Sat Oct 20, 5:45 pm)
Re: [LAD] ANN: convoLV2 0.2, Tom Szilagyi, (Sun Oct 21, 10:41 am)
Re: [LAD] ANN: convoLV2 0.2, Robin Gareus, (Sun Oct 21, 1:48 pm)
Re: [LAD] ANN: convoLV2 0.2, Fons Adriaensen, (Sun Oct 21, 1:04 pm)
Re: [LAD] ANN: convoLV2 0.2, Tom Szilagyi, (Sun Oct 21, 10:46 am)
Re: [LAD] ANN: convoLV2 0.2, David Robillard, (Sat Oct 20, 6:42 pm)
Re: [LAD] ANN: convoLV2 0.2, Fons Adriaensen, (Sat Oct 20, 11:44 am)
Re: [LAD] ANN: convoLV2 0.2, David Robillard, (Sat Oct 20, 6:19 pm)
Re: [LAD] ANN: convoLV2 0.2, Robin Gareus, (Sat Oct 20, 5:43 pm)
Re: [LAD] ANN: convoLV2 0.2, Fons Adriaensen, (Sat Oct 20, 9:03 pm)
Re: [LAD] ANN: convoLV2 0.2, David Robillard, (Sat Oct 20, 11:02 pm)
Re: [LAD] ANN: convoLV2 0.2, Fons Adriaensen, (Sun Oct 21, 11:38 am)
Re: [LAD] ANN: convoLV2 0.2, David Robillard, (Sun Oct 21, 5:38 pm)
Re: [LAD] ANN: convoLV2 0.2, Fons Adriaensen, (Sun Oct 21, 7:25 pm)
Re: [LAD] ANN: convoLV2 0.2, David Robillard, (Sun Oct 21, 7:49 pm)
Re: [LAD] ANN: convoLV2 0.2, Fons Adriaensen, (Sun Oct 21, 7:57 pm)
Re: [LAD] ANN: convoLV2 0.2, David Robillard, (Sun Oct 21, 5:36 pm)
Re: [LAD] ANN: convoLV2 0.2, Fons Adriaensen, (Sun Oct 21, 7:44 pm)
Re: [LAD] ANN: convoLV2 0.2, David Robillard, (Sun Oct 21, 7:59 pm)
Re: [LAD] ANN: convoLV2 0.2, Fons Adriaensen, (Sun Oct 21, 3:35 pm)
Re: [LAD] ANN: convoLV2 0.2, hermann meyer, (Sun Oct 21, 12:09 pm)
Re: [LAD] ANN: convoLV2 0.2, hermann meyer, (Sun Oct 21, 12:04 pm)
Re: [LAD] ANN: convoLV2 0.2, Fons Adriaensen, (Sun Oct 21, 12:15 pm)
Re: [LAD] ANN: convoLV2 0.2, hermann meyer, (Sun Oct 21, 12:02 pm)
Re: [LAD] ANN: convoLV2 0.2, hermann meyer, (Sat Oct 20, 7:54 am)
Re: [LAD] ANN: convoLV2 0.2, David Robillard, (Sat Oct 20, 11:47 pm)