Really a -dev topic but as there was discussion of moogladder here
recently.....

I have a version of moogladder that is much faster (manual example in
0.48s as against 1.8s).  No tables but avoids tanh calls for small and
large absolute arguments, as tanh is approx the same a x for |x|<0.5
and for |x|>4 it is sign(x).
comparing results for that test shows audio is the same.

Anyone wish to try?  Not yet committed to git
==John ffitch

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

Nice one! I'd like to give that a go :D

On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 6:23 PM, Paul Batchelor  wrote:
> I would love to see the code for it.
> -P
>
> On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 9:30 AM, jpff  wrote:
>>
>> Really a -dev topic but as there was discussion of moogladder here
>> recently.....
>>
>> I have a version of moogladder that is much faster (manual example in
>> 0.48s as against 1.8s).  No tables but avoids tanh calls for small and
>> large absolute arguments, as tanh is approx the same a x for |x|<0.5
>> and for |x|>4 it is sign(x).
>> comparing results for that test shows audio is the same.
>>
>> Anyone wish to try?  Not yet committed to git
>> ==John ffitch
>>
>> 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
>
>
> 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

I looked at the differeces between the current and proposed systems and 
they are identical (almost).  If you (all) are happy I will commit this 
version.

i suspect I might be able to do more but time is pressing (I have an idea 
for a few more % but I need headspace for the mathematics and we need a 
new release)

So should I commit this?

==John ff
On Wed, 30 Mar 2016, Anton Kholomiov wrote:

> 
> Thank you for updates John!
> 
> I’ve tried the new version of the moogladder on my test it shows approximately
> 2 times speed up:
> 
> I’ve tried the moogladder on chord progression of pad sound. The single note
> contains two instances of the filter. The heaviest load is the final chord: 8
> notes at the same time. So we get 16 of moogladders going on.
> 
> My results:
> 
> ;moogladder 
> ; final chord:  8 notes * 2 filters = 16 moogladders at the same time
> 
> ; 62% -- no-opt     (final chord)
> ; 44%               (first chord)
> 
> ; 24% -- new        (final chord) 
> ; 20% -- new        (first chord)
> 
> Complete report of top | grep csound:
> 
> moogladder no-opt
> 
> CPU   Mem  Time
> 
> 39,5  0,3   0:01.41 csound 
> 44,8  0,3   0:02.76 csound 
> 37,5  0,3   0:03.89 csound 
> 38,8  0,3   0:05.06 csound 
> 43,8  0,3   0:06.38 csound 
> 26,5  0,3   0:07.18 csound 
> 43,5  0,3   0:08.49 csound 
> 32,9  0,3   0:09.48 csound 
> 62,7  0,3   0:11.37 csound 
> 18,3  0,3   0:11.92 csound
> 
> moogladder new
> 
> 11,3  0,3   0:00.34 csound-mg 
> 20,9  0,3   0:00.97 csound-mg 
> 13,9  0,3   0:01.39 csound-mg 
> 16,3  0,3   0:01.88 csound-mg 
> 16,3  0,3   0:02.37 csound-mg 
> 14,3  0,3   0:02.80 csound-mg 
> 16,3  0,3   0:03.29 csound-mg 
> 14,6  0,3   0:03.73 csound-mg 
> 24,2  0,3   0:04.46 csound-mg 
> 19,6  0,3   0:05.05 csound-mg
>  8,3  0,3   0:05.30 csound-mg
> 
> Links to rendered files so you can listen to how it sounds:
> 
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/cki05znt029ta8j/moogladder-sounds.zip?dl=0
> 
> I’ve attached the file is so you can reproduce the tests.
> 
> 
> ​2016-03-30 20:23 GMT+03:00 Paul Batchelor :
>       I would love to see the code for it.
> -P
> 
> On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 9:30 AM, jpff  wrote:
>       Really a -dev topic but as there was discussion of
>       moogladder here
>       recently.....
>
>       I have a version of moogladder that is much faster (manual
>       example in
>       0.48s as against 1.8s).  No tables but avoids tanh calls for
>       small and
>       large absolute arguments, as tanh is approx the same a x for
>       |x|<0.5
>       and for |x|>4 it is sign(x).
>       comparing results for that test shows audio is the same.
>
>       Anyone wish to try?  Not yet committed to git
>       ==John ffitch
>
>       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
> 
> 
> 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
> 
> 
> 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
>

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

Someone have approximated it with polynomial in the Mapple:

~~~

The best rational approximation to tanh(x)tanh⁡(x) with numerator and denominator of degree 3 on the interval [0,3.1][0,3.1] (as provided by Maple's minimax function) is

(-.67436811832e-5+(.2468149110712040+(.583691066395175e-1+.3357335044280075e-1*x)*x)*x)/(.2464845986383725+(.609347197060491e-1+(.1086202599228572+.2874707922475963e-1*x)*x)*x)

This (call it f(x)f(x)) has maximum error .2735944241730870e-4, which is considerably less than 2^(-8).
On the interval [−3.1,3.1][−3.1,3.1], use sgn(x)f(|x|)sgn(x)f(|x|).

~~~

Maybe we can try out this solution?  It should be much faster.

The author says that it's defined for interval [-3, 3]. It can catch almost all signals for audio applications

2016-03-30 23:35 GMT+03:00 Anton Kholomiov <anton.kholomiov@gmail.com>:

I've found out a discussion on how to calculate tanh. Maybe it can be useful:

http://math.stackexchange.com/questions/107292/rapid-approximation-of-tanhx

2016-03-30 23:22 GMT+03:00 Anton Kholomiov <anton.kholomiov@gmail.com>:

Thank you for updates John!

I’ve tried the new version of the moogladder on my test it shows approximately 2 times speed up:

I’ve tried the moogladder on chord progression of pad sound. The single note contains two instances of the filter. The heaviest load is the final chord: 8 notes at the same time. So we get 16 of moogladders going on.

My results:

;moogladder         
; final chord:  8 notes * 2 filters = 16 moogladders at the same time

; 62% -- no-opt     (final chord)
; 44%               (first chord)

; 24% -- new        (final chord) 
; 20% -- new        (first chord)

Complete report of top | grep csound:

moogladder no-opt

CPU   Mem  Time

39,5  0,3   0:01.41 csound      
44,8  0,3   0:02.76 csound      
37,5  0,3   0:03.89 csound      
38,8  0,3   0:05.06 csound      
43,8  0,3   0:06.38 csound      
26,5  0,3   0:07.18 csound      
43,5  0,3   0:08.49 csound      
32,9  0,3   0:09.48 csound      
62,7  0,3   0:11.37 csound      
18,3  0,3   0:11.92 csound

moogladder new

11,3  0,3   0:00.34 csound-mg   
20,9  0,3   0:00.97 csound-mg   
13,9  0,3   0:01.39 csound-mg   
16,3  0,3   0:01.88 csound-mg   
16,3  0,3   0:02.37 csound-mg   
14,3  0,3   0:02.80 csound-mg   
16,3  0,3   0:03.29 csound-mg   
14,6  0,3   0:03.73 csound-mg   
24,2  0,3   0:04.46 csound-mg   
19,6  0,3   0:05.05 csound-mg   
 8,3  0,3   0:05.30 csound-mg

Links to rendered files so you can listen to how it sounds:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/cki05znt029ta8j/moogladder-sounds.zip?dl=0

I’ve attached the file is so you can reproduce the tests.

​

2016-03-30 20:23 GMT+03:00 Paul Batchelor <ralphbluecoat@gmail.com>:

I would love to see the code for it.

-P

On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 9:30 AM, jpff <jpff@codemist.co.uk> wrote:

Really a -dev topic but as there was discussion of moogladder here
recently.....

I have a version of moogladder that is much faster (manual example in
0.48s as against 1.8s).  No tables but avoids tanh calls for small and
large absolute arguments, as tanh is approx the same a x for |x|<0.5
and for |x|>4 it is sign(x).
comparing results for that test shows audio is the same.

Anyone wish to try?  Not yet committed to git
==John ffitch

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

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

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

I tried a rational approx and it was the same speed

Time for dinner now

==John
PS I tried table look up and it did notin.

On Wed, 30 Mar 2016, Anton Kholomiov wrote:

> It's not faster with polynomial solution. Surprisingly it's even worse on the
> final chord.
> 
> ~~~
> 5,3    0,3   0:00.16 csound-mg-poly           
> 17,9  0,3   0:00.70 csound-mg-poly           
> 18,9  0,3   0:01.27 csound-mg-poly           
> 16,9  0,3   0:01.78 csound-mg-poly           
> 17,6  0,3   0:02.31 csound-mg-poly           
> 19,6  0,3   0:02.90 csound-mg-poly           
> 14,3  0,3   0:03.33 csound-mg-poly           
> 19,6  0,3   0:03.92 csound-mg-poly           
> 18,3  0,3   0:04.47 csound-mg-poly           
> 28,5  0,3   0:05.33 csound-mg-poly 
> ~~~
> 
> 2016-03-30 23:44 GMT+03:00 Victor Lazzarini :
>       Table lookup would be faster if we are removing the function call.
>
>       Victor LazzariniDean of Arts, Celtic Studies, and Philosophy
> Maynooth University
> Ireland
> 
> On 30 Mar 2016, at 21:39, Anton Kholomiov 
> wrote:
>
>       Someone have approximated it with polynomial in the Mapple:
> ~~~
> 
> The best rational approximation to tanh(x)tanh⁡(x) with numerator
> and denominator of degree 3 on the interval [0,3.1][0,3.1] (as
> provided by Maple's minimax function) is
> 
> (-.67436811832e-5+(.2468149110712040+(.583691066395175e-1+.3357335044280075e-
> 1*x)*x)*x)/(.2464845986383725+(.609347197060491e-1+(.1086202599228572+.287470
>       7922475963e-1*x)*x)*x)
> 
> This (call it f(x)f(x)) has maximum error .2735944241730870e-4,
> which is considerably less than 2^(-8).
> On the interval [−3.1,3.1][−3.1,3.1],
> use sgn(x)f(|x|)sgn(x)f(|x|).
> 
> ~~~
> 
> Maybe we can try out this solution?  It should be much faster.
> The author says that it's defined for interval [-3, 3]. It can
> catch almost all signals for audio applications
> 
> 2016-03-30 23:35 GMT+03:00 Anton Kholomiov
> :
>       I've found out a discussion on how to calculate tanh.
>       Maybe it can be useful:
> http://math.stackexchange.com/questions/107292/rapid-approximation-of-tanhx
> 
> 2016-03-30 23:22 GMT+03:00 Anton Kholomiov
> :
>
>       Thank you for updates John!
>
>       I’ve tried the new version of the moogladder on
>       my test it shows approximately 2 times speed up:
>
>       I’ve tried the moogladder on chord progression
>       of pad sound. The single note contains two
>       instances of the filter. The heaviest load is
>       the final chord: 8 notes at the same time. So we
>       get 16 of moogladders going on.
>
>       My results:
> 
> ;moogladder 
> ; final chord:  8 notes * 2 filters = 16 moogladders at the same time
> 
> ; 62% -- no-opt     (final chord)
> ; 44%               (first chord)
> 
> ; 24% -- new        (final chord) 
> ; 20% -- new        (first chord)
>
>       Complete report of top | grep csound:
>
>       moogladder no-opt
> 
> CPU   Mem  Time
> 
> 39,5  0,3   0:01.41 csound 
> 44,8  0,3   0:02.76 csound 
> 37,5  0,3   0:03.89 csound 
> 38,8  0,3   0:05.06 csound 
> 43,8  0,3   0:06.38 csound 
> 26,5  0,3   0:07.18 csound 
> 43,5  0,3   0:08.49 csound 
> 32,9  0,3   0:09.48 csound 
> 62,7  0,3   0:11.37 csound 
> 18,3  0,3   0:11.92 csound
>
>       moogladder new
> 
> 11,3  0,3   0:00.34 csound-mg 
> 20,9  0,3   0:00.97 csound-mg 
> 13,9  0,3   0:01.39 csound-mg 
> 16,3  0,3   0:01.88 csound-mg 
> 16,3  0,3   0:02.37 csound-mg 
> 14,3  0,3   0:02.80 csound-mg 
> 16,3  0,3   0:03.29 csound-mg 
> 14,6  0,3   0:03.73 csound-mg 
> 24,2  0,3   0:04.46 csound-mg 
> 19,6  0,3   0:05.05 csound-mg
>  8,3  0,3   0:05.30 csound-mg
>
>       Links to rendered files so you can listen to how
>       it sounds:
>
>       https://www.dropbox.com/s/cki05znt029ta8j/moogladder-sounds.zip?dl=0
>
>       I’ve attached the file is so you can reproduce
>       the tests.
> 
> 
> 
> ​2016-03-30 20:23 GMT+03:00 Paul Batchelor
> :
>       I would love to see the code for it.
> -P
> 
> On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 9:30 AM, jpff
>  wrote:
>       Really a -dev topic but as there was
>       discussion of moogladder here
>       recently.....
>
>       I have a version of moogladder that is
>       much faster (manual example in
>       0.48s as against 1.8s).  No tables but
>       avoids tanh calls for small and
>       large absolute arguments, as tanh is
>       approx the same a x for |x|<0.5
>       and for |x|>4 it is sign(x).
>       comparing results for that test shows
>       audio is the same.
>
>       Anyone wish to try?  Not yet committed to
>       git
>       ==John ffitch
>
>       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
> 
> 
> 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
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 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 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
> 
> 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
>

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

Is this implementation a replacement or an additional processing
method? I would prefer to have precision as an option, if possible.

On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 5:04 PM, jpff  wrote:
> I tried a rational approx and it was the same speed
>
> Time for dinner now
>
> ==John
> PS I tried table look up and it did notin.
>
> On Wed, 30 Mar 2016, Anton Kholomiov wrote:
>
>> It's not faster with polynomial solution. Surprisingly it's even worse on
>> the
>> final chord.
>>
>> ~~~
>> 5,3    0,3   0:00.16 csound-mg-poly
>> 17,9  0,3   0:00.70 csound-mg-poly
>> 18,9  0,3   0:01.27 csound-mg-poly
>> 16,9  0,3   0:01.78 csound-mg-poly
>> 17,6  0,3   0:02.31 csound-mg-poly
>> 19,6  0,3   0:02.90 csound-mg-poly
>> 14,3  0,3   0:03.33 csound-mg-poly
>> 19,6  0,3   0:03.92 csound-mg-poly
>> 18,3  0,3   0:04.47 csound-mg-poly
>> 28,5  0,3   0:05.33 csound-mg-poly
>> ~~~
>>
>> 2016-03-30 23:44 GMT+03:00 Victor Lazzarini :
>>       Table lookup would be faster if we are removing the function call.
>>
>>       Victor LazzariniDean of Arts, Celtic Studies, and Philosophy
>>
>> Maynooth University
>> Ireland
>>
>> On 30 Mar 2016, at 21:39, Anton Kholomiov 
>> wrote:
>>
>>       Someone have approximated it with polynomial in the Mapple:
>> ~~~
>>
>> The best rational approximation to tanh(x)tanh⁡(x) with numerator
>> and denominator of degree 3 on the interval [0,3.1][0,3.1] (as
>> provided by Maple's minimax function) is
>>
>>
>> (-.67436811832e-5+(.2468149110712040+(.583691066395175e-1+.3357335044280075e-
>>
>> 1*x)*x)*x)/(.2464845986383725+(.609347197060491e-1+(.1086202599228572+.287470
>>       7922475963e-1*x)*x)*x)
>>
>> This (call it f(x)f(x)) has maximum error .2735944241730870e-4,
>> which is considerably less than 2^(-8).
>> On the interval [−3.1,3.1][−3.1,3.1],
>> use sgn(x)f(|x|)sgn(x)f(|x|).
>>
>> ~~~
>>
>> Maybe we can try out this solution?  It should be much faster.
>> The author says that it's defined for interval [-3, 3]. It can
>> catch almost all signals for audio applications
>>
>> 2016-03-30 23:35 GMT+03:00 Anton Kholomiov
>> :
>>       I've found out a discussion on how to calculate tanh.
>>       Maybe it can be useful:
>>
>> http://math.stackexchange.com/questions/107292/rapid-approximation-of-tanhx
>>
>> 2016-03-30 23:22 GMT+03:00 Anton Kholomiov
>> :
>>
>>       Thank you for updates John!
>>
>>       I’ve tried the new version of the moogladder on
>>       my test it shows approximately 2 times speed up:
>>
>>       I’ve tried the moogladder on chord progression
>>       of pad sound. The single note contains two
>>       instances of the filter. The heaviest load is
>>       the final chord: 8 notes at the same time. So we
>>       get 16 of moogladders going on.
>>
>>       My results:
>>
>> ;moogladder ; final chord:  8 notes * 2 filters = 16 moogladders at the
>> same time
>>
>> ; 62% -- no-opt     (final chord)
>> ; 44%               (first chord)
>>
>> ; 24% -- new        (final chord) ; 20% -- new        (first chord)
>>
>>       Complete report of top | grep csound:
>>
>>       moogladder no-opt
>>
>> CPU   Mem  Time
>>
>> 39,5  0,3   0:01.41 csound 44,8  0,3   0:02.76 csound 37,5  0,3   0:03.89
>> csound 38,8  0,3   0:05.06 csound 43,8  0,3   0:06.38 csound 26,5  0,3
>> 0:07.18 csound 43,5  0,3   0:08.49 csound 32,9  0,3   0:09.48 csound 62,7
>> 0,3   0:11.37 csound 18,3  0,3   0:11.92 csound
>>
>>       moogladder new
>>
>> 11,3  0,3   0:00.34 csound-mg 20,9  0,3   0:00.97 csound-mg 13,9  0,3
>> 0:01.39 csound-mg 16,3  0,3   0:01.88 csound-mg 16,3  0,3   0:02.37
>> csound-mg 14,3  0,3   0:02.80 csound-mg 16,3  0,3   0:03.29 csound-mg 14,6
>> 0,3   0:03.73 csound-mg 24,2  0,3   0:04.46 csound-mg 19,6  0,3   0:05.05
>> csound-mg
>>  8,3  0,3   0:05.30 csound-mg
>>
>>       Links to rendered files so you can listen to how
>>       it sounds:
>>
>>       https://www.dropbox.com/s/cki05znt029ta8j/moogladder-sounds.zip?dl=0
>>
>>       I’ve attached the file is so you can reproduce
>>       the tests.
>>
>>
>>
>> 2016-03-30 20:23 GMT+03:00 Paul Batchelor
>> :
>>       I would love to see the code for it.
>> -P
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 9:30 AM, jpff
>>  wrote:
>>       Really a -dev topic but as there was
>>       discussion of moogladder here
>>       recently.....
>>
>>       I have a version of moogladder that is
>>       much faster (manual example in
>>       0.48s as against 1.8s).  No tables but
>>       avoids tanh calls for small and
>>       large absolute arguments, as tanh is
>>       approx the same a x for |x|<0.5
>>       and for |x|>4 it is sign(x).
>>       comparing results for that test shows
>>       audio is the same.
>>
>>       Anyone wish to try?  Not yet committed to
>>       git
>>       ==John ffitch
>>
>>       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
>>
>>
>> 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
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 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 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
>>
>> 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
>>
>
> 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

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