[chuck-users] other ways to live-code with time
rdpoor at gmail.com
Wed Apr 29 11:39:56 EDT 2009
On 29 Apr 2009, at 06:32, Kassen wrote:
> <<discussions about scheduling, multiple cores, stuttering sound,
> philosophical differences between ChucK and Impromptu, etc>>>
I really appreciate ChucK's deterministic timing approach, but I
predict that Impromptu's non-deterministic approach is ultimately a
ChucK promises deterministic timing on a single processor. The only
way ChucK can take advantage of multiple processors is by synching
them together, and techniques for synchronizing multiple ChucKs are
generally non-deterministic. And it takes extra work to do this.
If I understand correctly, Impromptu uses any available processing
power, regardless of where it comes from.
So I believe that in a world where processing power gets cheaper and
faster every year, Impromptu will have an advantage.
[P.S.: It's like the early arguments that Ethernet was useless for
real-time processing because it was inherently non-deterministic. As
Ethernet got faster (3mbps, 10mbps, 100mbps, 1gbps) that argument
largely fell by the wayside.]
More information about the chuck-users