KVR Audio

james0tucson · Post by **james0tucson** » Sat Nov 12, 2005 8:46 pm

mm_FX wrote:I can fully appreciate what people are saying, but you'd really be surprised how many musicians cannot understand an operating system file-system.

I guess I'm not seeing how the argument follows that such people should be allowed to use a computer. Or a desk, or a file cabinet for that matter.

If you can understand the "record, sleeve, box" concept you can understand a computer filesystem. There is no excuse, really.

Big Tick · Post by **Big Tick** » Sat Nov 12, 2005 9:24 pm

you still use asm for full code? wow. actually my compiler generates faster code...

Nor for full code... for the dsp part of the synth, yes.
And I don't know of any compiler that will use SSE opcodes on its own, in order to pack 4 operations into a single one.
'Tick

aciddose · Post by **aciddose** » Sat Nov 12, 2005 9:35 pm

edit:

i should have made my rebuttal by saying, of course, there are extensions and macros available for that!

you can disregard most of this next part, because i think the cost of having huge size la-ass style code isnt that bad anyway.

:end edit

if you have 82kb of asm for your core, something is wrong. let us assume the average instruction length is a tab expanded to five spaces, with sixteen characters for the instruction, and sixteen for comments. that gives 37 characters per instruction.

this gives likely 2270 instructions. not bad if you've coded out several duplicates of the same code, but that in of itself is bad.

a fast (register) function call will on average take only a few cycles (<10?) or so. and the effects of repeating duplicate code? well, i'll assume you were exaggerating that number for your own good. ever heard of code reuse? saving 10 cycles isnt worth it when you're spending so many more making the cpu deal with extra code!

The Chase · Post by **The Chase** » Sat Nov 12, 2005 9:38 pm

Does this mean that plugs with installers are potentially mroe CPU efficient?

aciddose · Post by **aciddose** » Sat Nov 12, 2005 9:39 pm

Big Tick · Post by **Big Tick** » Sat Nov 12, 2005 9:42 pm

aciddose · Post by **aciddose** » Sat Nov 12, 2005 9:45 pm

i thought you support installers and fast code?

i started this hurassment because i thought the idea of an installer made in sse asm would be great. maybe i tried to create some inspiration or motivate someone, but noooo.

i see i mentioned speed at first, sorry, off topic!

anyway the idea is still the same, installers and registry code sucks!

Big Tick · Post by **Big Tick** » Sat Nov 12, 2005 9:49 pm

Yes, but the two are unrelated. How they got mixed up in that thread is a mystery.

martian · Post by **martian** » Sat Nov 12, 2005 9:51 pm

cant be arsed to read the whole thread, but installers that dont uninstall everything piss me off. so if its something simple id prefer just a dll and pdf.

Installers - why