[CM] [newbie] Is CLM the right tool for me?

[Heinrich Taube]

maybe this is only snd? this is what happens in sndlib:

	(add-hook! optimization-hook (lambda (n) (format #t "opt: ~A~%" n)))
         ; error optimization-hook: unbound variable

but actually ... would it be possible to have a way to convert a  
(define-instrument ...) into .C source code string? it wouldnt have to  
compile anything like clm3 --  but just blast out C code that  i could  
compile and link statically by hand when i build my app. i could also  
be respobsible for generateing the scheme wrapper for it if need be.

that would be the best of both worlds, i love the fact that i can run  
interpreted but to do a long piece it still seems generally too slow   
(btw im not complaining, its amazing to me that i can do this at  
all!) . with a c code generator, I could still run interpreted while  
building/testing instruemtns or making shortish examples (i use  
sndlib  daily for my acoustics class)  but then -- for instruemnts  
that are fixed --  i could simply generate its c code and then compile  
link to its .o code when build the app.

>
> The optimizer is unhappy about the vector of closures -- if string1- 
> stiffness
> were a vector of clm generators instead, it would probably run at  
> normal
> speed.  You can ask the run macro to tell you why it gives up by  
> setting
> the optimization-hook:
>
> (add-hook! optimization-hook (lambda (n) (snd-display "opt: ~A~%" n)))
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Cmdist mailing list
> Cmdist at ccrma.stanford.edu
> http://ccrma-mail.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/cmdist