HISE Logo Forum
    • Categories
    • Register
    • Login

    SNEX weirdness or me ?

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved General Questions
    22 Posts 2 Posters 752 Views
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • Christoph HartC
      Christoph Hart @ustk
      last edited by

      • Your TwoOverT is in fact TwoTimesT. This blows up the filter immediately :)
      • You're still using an outer class variable in processFilter (in this case a0). The error is that SNEX compiles and doesn't complain, not that it doesn't work. I'll try to isolate this issue in the playground and make a test for it.
      Christoph HartC ustkU 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • Christoph HartC
        Christoph Hart @Christoph Hart
        last edited by

        So I could dumb it down to a minimal test case which is indeed failing:

        struct Outer
        {
        	struct Inner
        	{
        		int processInner() const
        		{
        			// this should not compile,
        			// the variable resolver must detect that we're
        			// in the inner class and not the Outer
        			return a0;
        		}
        		
        		int value = 0;
        	};
        	
        	Inner data1;
        	
        	int a0 = 12;
        
        	int processOuter()
        	{
        		return data1.processInner();
        	}
        };
        
        Outer outer;
        
        int main(int input)
        {
        	return outer.processOuter();
        }
        

        So the parser does not detect that it's an illegal operation and just creates a pointer with a 4 byte offset (as it would for the valid member access). This then works with the first instance because the memory address of data1 is the same as the Outer object itself, but it will not work with other memory addresses (this is why your filter failed at the second channel).

        Now the fix shouldn't be too difficult but it's been quite some time that I crawled around in the internals of the SNEX compiler...

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • ustkU
          ustk @Christoph Hart
          last edited by

          @Christoph-Hart said in SNEX weirdness or me ?:

          • Your TwoOverT is in fact TwoTimesT. This blows up the filter immediately :)

          Nope, T = 1/fs, TwoOverT = 2 / (1 / fs) => simplifies in 2*fs

          • You're still using an outer class variable in processFilter (in this case a0).

          I am trying to keep common/shared things together and separate what it needs to be. Now I could place a0 as class member but would it be better or not, this I don't know. :smiling_face_with_halo:

          I was thinking about a shared memory issue or something related, but as for the technicality of it 😬

          In the case of such simple DSP like filter, harmonics, etc... Would using struct over class change anything in the context of SNEX?

          Can't help pressing F5 in the forum...

          Christoph HartC 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • Christoph HartC
            Christoph Hart @ustk
            last edited by

            Nope, T = 1/fs, TwoOverT = 2 / (1 / fs) => simplifies in 2*fs

            One formula (yours) is blowing the filter into NaNs immediately and one formula (mine) makes the filter work ok(ish) - it still blows up if the cutoff frequency goes near Nyquist.

            I am trying to keep common/shared things together and separate what it needs to be.

            Yes that's a good approach, all you need to do to make it work is to add another argument to the processFilter() function where you pass in a0 from the outer class. It's just not legal C++ to access the outer member from the inner class.

            ustkU 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
            • ustkU
              ustk @Christoph Hart
              last edited by

              @Christoph-Hart said in SNEX weirdness or me ?:

              One formula (yours) is blowing the filter into NaNs immediately and one formula (mine) makes the filter work ok(ish) - it still blows up if the cutoff frequency goes near Nyquist.

              Yeah I got that blowing which is part of this algorithm (Pirkle/Zavalishin) so it is mandatory to OS at a minimum of x2, and only then I could stabilise it

              It's just not legal C++ to access the outer member from the inner class.

              Oh thanks! That is quite an important hint!

              Can't help pressing F5 in the forum...

              Christoph HartC 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • Christoph HartC
                Christoph Hart @ustk
                last edited by

                @ustk should be fixed - the compiler will scream at you now…

                ustkU 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                • ustkU
                  ustk @Christoph Hart
                  last edited by

                  @Christoph-Hart So in the end I was doing something silly that didn't need a fix if I had followed the conventional approach of C++ 🤗

                  Can't help pressing F5 in the forum...

                  Christoph HartC 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • Christoph HartC
                    Christoph Hart @ustk
                    last edited by

                    @ustk yes, but it's the job of the compiler to tell you that you're doing something stupid and the actual effect it had on your class was totally unpredictable, so it's definitely better now than before :)

                    ustkU 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                    • ustkU
                      ustk @Christoph Hart
                      last edited by ustk

                      @Christoph-Hart Hmmm... So now it complains on the index type in the process template

                      Screenshot 2024-10-13 at 22.50.47.png

                      private:
                      	using IndexType = index::clamped<MAX_NUM_CHANNELS, false>;
                      	IndexType idx;
                      

                      But it is impossible to stick it as member parameter or declare it as constant, am I right?
                      So what would be the procedure then?
                      Sorry for the C++ crash course I still need...

                      Can't help pressing F5 in the forum...

                      ustkU 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • ustkU
                        ustk @ustk
                        last edited by

                        @Christoph-Hart both process and idx are in the same template so this shouldn't be an issue if I am not mistaken

                        Can't help pressing F5 in the forum...

                        ustkU 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • ustkU
                          ustk @ustk
                          last edited by

                          @ustk Boing boing 🙂

                          Can't help pressing F5 in the forum...

                          ustkU 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • ustkU
                            ustk @ustk
                            last edited by ustk

                            @Christoph-Hart Even doing this throws the error:

                            Screenshot 2024-10-15 at 12.20.09.png

                            It seems index is considered to be outside

                            Can't help pressing F5 in the forum...

                            Christoph HartC 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • Christoph HartC
                              Christoph Hart @ustk
                              last edited by

                              @ustk ah yeah actually I caught a similar error with the index classes in my test suite when I implemented the fix but it seems that the test suite didn‘t cover index usage within a class.

                              Back to the SNEX compiler internals I guess…

                              Christoph HartC 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • Christoph HartC
                                Christoph Hart @Christoph Hart
                                last edited by

                                Alright, please try again, now it should not mess with the index templates anymore.

                                ustkU 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 1
                                • ustkU
                                  ustk @Christoph Hart
                                  last edited by

                                  @Christoph-Hart Thanks! Building now...

                                  Can't help pressing F5 in the forum...

                                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • ustkU
                                    ustk @Christoph Hart
                                    last edited by

                                    @Christoph-Hart Working smoothly! Thanks a lot for the fix! 👍

                                    Can't help pressing F5 in the forum...

                                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • First post
                                      Last post

                                    24

                                    Online

                                    1.8k

                                    Users

                                    12.1k

                                    Topics

                                    104.9k

                                    Posts