As long as particle order is correct and all necessary conductors are sprk-ed, a set of operations can be completed in one frame, so particle order is relevant to the execution time needed for a set of operations. Solid spark makes sure the operations are executed once every frame, so solid spark is relevant to the frequency of executing the set of operations. Surely sld-spk-sbfrm requires both particle ordering and sld-spk, but do you consider operations with only part-order to be subframe?
@DUC, Your two comments seems contradicting to me, maybe there is a misunderstanding here. I am referring to cases which all operations(i.e. extend followed by retract) are done within one frame intentionally, but only perform such operations every 8 frames. Your lower comment do not agree it to be subframe, but your upper comment says that operations with time compressed from several frames to one frame is subframe. This is rather confusing.
... continued. Operations, however, that would normally take several frames, and now only take one, I would define as subframe. The movement of PSTN forward and back in one frame, or the creation and removal of a particle in one frame, etc. are examples. And they all require solid spark. Which is why I hold that solid spark is the foundation for subframe electronics.
@lamyipfu I don't thank one can define subframe like that. Even though subframe literally means "multiple operations in one frame," I do not believe it can be taken literally. If a save has more than one particle, there are necessarily more than one operation per frame. Many of them are not intended, and are not vital to the purpose of the save. I would classify FILT operations as an incidental operation. continued...
That's why we have reddit.
Don't post saves with text only.
@DUC, is subframe defined to be the usage of solid sprk? I loosely use the concept of subframe by completing all ARAY-FILT operations within one frame, but the circuit only updates every 8 frames to save space/avoid conv. Does it count? They are not solid-sprk-sbfrm, but distinct from normal serial-circuit as usually a simple modification makes them sld-spk-sbfrm. Maybe use weak and strong(default) subframe as indicator? What do you think?
Concepts like solid spark are easy to identify, whereas with classical electronics, you can range anywhere from battery and metal to a full computer, with so many degrees in between. Besides, I was suggesting we classify subframe creations because that would make it a lot easier to make a collection of them.
@NoVIcE Well, first of all it's kinda hard to classify 'classical' electronics because there are so many degrees of complexity it makes it near impossible. But subframe has concepts that are more concrete and more definable; subframe is more like building blocks that you put together. Because subframe operates all in one frame, there is little time involved, which makes subframe 2 dimensional instead of three.
@DUC we dont classify 'classical' electronics, why should we do it with subframe?