For profiling the latest boot, use `systemd-analyze critical-chain` (Unicode tree of blocking units) or `systemd-analyze plot > boot.svg` (SVG profiler view of all units).
I'm surprised the FAQ does not mention it, but the pattern is that the last release of the year is made the LTS version. Notice the release date is always EOY. This is nothing strictly documented but it has been that way for years.
You're not sequencing notes you're sequencing multiple parallel levels of musical information which are eventually rendered as notes.
One of those levels could be context-related microtiming - the context being position in the bar, or the actual shape of the phrase, the position in the phrase, and so on.
This isn't sequencing in the classical sense, it's generative composition.
It's not popular because it's much more abstract and harder to work with than "Play this pattern."
There's a lot of unexplored potential in deterministic systems that work with music at these more abstract levels.
"Parallel levels" is a nice way to put it. On a daw or drum machine, you have some sequence of notes or drum hits, that's one layer. And then you apply, say, 50% swing, that's another layer.
The "petri net" or "rhythm necklace" can compact this into a single layer of information. I think something similar can be achieved by using compound meter -- 12/8 instead of "4/4 with swung 1/8th notes" in standard notation, or using something other than the standard 16 steps on a drum machine.
My brain has always struggled with compound meter, somehow I just see a fraction should just be reduced. Much easier for me to imagine a grid that needs different levels of resolution in order to describe certain patterns.
Trying to learn independently, I've found much more difficulty in articulating why a given rhythm is so good, compared to the wealth of theory for understanding great melodies and harmonies.
So it's great to see others building tools and ideas around rhythm, it's a very deep and fun topic to explore.
So this is about visualisation more than different behaviour? There are still N static notes with a cursor moving from start to end, looping over. It's not clear from the blog. Still, I always enjoy experiments in that domain, thanks
Now the reasoning isn't present in the patch but it probably is because they want step increments and -fms-extensions is a small-ish first step. Maybe -fplan9-extensions could make sense later, in a few years.
Plan 9 extensions would only require enough examples to justify and might not take years. Though your taking years assessment would be right if there's a dearth of kernel spots to add up where automatic pointer conversion for anonymous fields, or using the typedef name to access them, offer some improvement, not necessarily even a huge improvement.
Since with the Microsoft extension, it was just waiting until enough examples were woven into the discussion to overcome the back and forth that was preventing "biting the bullet".
> For example, my blog search engine, which indexes on the order of 500,000+ words across 1,000+ documents, can return results in < 10ms because the indices can be queried incredibly quickly.
This is odd. Let's do a back-of-the-envelope estimation. DDR4 bandwidth is at least 12GB/s. 500k words is around 3MB. So, reading this amount takes 0.25ms, ignoring CPU caches. It sounds reasonable to assume the matching algorithm can run in-between that speed and 40 times slower for the 10ms mark.
This is one example where precomputation is probably not needed: bruteforce if N is small enough.
Applications want to receive/provide a stream (X sample-rate, Y sample format, Z channels) and have it routed to the right destination, that probably is not configured with the same parameters. Having all applications responsible for handling this conversion is not doable. Having the kernel handle this conversion is not a good idea. The routing decision-making needs to be implemented somewhere as well. Let's not ignore the complexity involved in format negotiation as well.
The scenario of a DAW (pro-audio usage) is too specific to generalise from that. That is the only kind of software that really cares about codec configuration, latencies and picking its own routing (or rather to let the user pick routing from the DAW GUI).
reply