[Csnd] Chn vs Zak
| Date | 2023-04-19 17:55 |
| From | Mike McGonagle |
| Subject | [Csnd] Chn vs Zak |
| I've been using chn to create both k-rate and a-rate busses within my orchestra. I only started to use chn because I seem to remember reading that Zak is no longer being maintained. Guess my question is if anyone has done any performance tests using these two sets of opcodes? It's one faster than the other? More stable? Thanks, Mike
Csound mailing list
Csound@listserv.heanet.ie
https://listserv.heanet.ie/cgi-bin/wa?A0=CSOUND
Send bugs reports to
https://github.com/csound/csound/issues
Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
|
| Date | 2023-04-19 19:12 |
| From | Rory Walsh |
| Subject | Re: [Csnd] Chn vs Zak |
The zak opcodes are part of the native Csound opcodes, so they are still being maintained afaik. As for which is faster, I'm not sure. I have used zak in the past, but that was before the channel system was added. Now I prefer to use that because I find the syntax more user friendly. On Wed, 19 Apr 2023 at 17:55, Mike McGonagle <mjmogo@gmail.com> wrote: I've been using chn to create both k-rate and a-rate busses within my orchestra. I only started to use chn because I seem to remember reading that Zak is no longer being maintained. |