Allow NAM_SAMPLE_FLOAT to switch model input to float instead of double #48
Conversation
|
Good stuff. JUCE, for instance, uses float buffers, so keeping an extra double-precision buffer as an adapter for NAM is a bit annoying. |
NAM/convnet.cpp
Outdated
| @@ -99,7 +99,7 @@ convnet::ConvNet::ConvNet(const int channels, const std::vector<int>& dilations, | |||
| { | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| convnet::ConvNet::ConvNet(const double loudness, const int channels, const std::vector<int>& dilations, | |||
| convnet::ConvNet::ConvNet(const NAM_SAMPLE loudness, const int channels, const std::vector<int>& dilations, | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nit: I don't like loudness being of "sample" type--it's a parameter of the model.
But I get that it mainly serves to do arithmetic with samples, so I can live with it.
NAM/dsp.cpp
Outdated
| void DSP::process(double** inputs, double** outputs, const int num_channels, const int num_frames, | ||
| const double input_gain, const double output_gain, | ||
| void DSP::process(NAM_SAMPLE** inputs, NAM_SAMPLE** outputs, const int num_channels, const int num_frames, | ||
| const NAM_SAMPLE input_gain, const NAM_SAMPLE output_gain, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah, it looks weird having all of these parameters being called "samples". Can you point me to somewhere else that follows this convention? It just doesn't sound right.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I wasn't sure either, and I'm fine either way. "loudness" is an internal parameter anyway, and "input_gain" and "output_gain" should be probably be removed since the plugin just passes "1.0" and handles gain itself (as does my LV2 plugin).
|
By the way, what about |
No - the models operate with floats regardless of the input sample precision. |
|
Ok, I've reverted the parameters to double. |
This PR adds a NAM_SAMPLE #define that is used instead of "double" for input samples for model processing.
If NAM_SAMPLE_FLOAT is defined, this will switch NAM_SAMPLE to "float". Otherwise it remains "double", so no there is no change in existing behavior.
This allows processing loops using "float" to avoid having to convert buffers to "double".