On Wednesday 11 December 2002 18.26, Steve Harris wrote: > On Wed, Dec 11, 2002 at 04:35:16 +0100, David Olofson wrote: > > > Maybe. My objection to converters is more that they imply two > > > parallel representations of frequency (in the broad sense of > > > the word), which seems like a mistake. > > > > They are not parallel. One actually *is* frequency, while the > > other expresses pitch in relation to a scale. > > > > It's like comparing inline code with calls through function > > pointers, basically. > > I dont see how, its more like having a string and int > representation of the same thing.
No, not unless the string representation is supposed to translate in a number of different ways, depending on what character table you use. In code, for linear_pitch: actual_pitch = linear_pitch; whereas for note_pitch (simplified; no interpolation): actual_pitch = scale[note_pitch]; There is only one valid relation between actual pitch and linear pitch, while the relation between actual pitch and *note* pitch is user defined. //David Olofson - Programmer, Composer, Open Source Advocate .- The Return of Audiality! --------------------------------. | Free/Open Source Audio Engine for use in Games or Studio. | | RT and off-line synth. Scripting. Sample accurate timing. | `---------------------------> http://olofson.net/audiality -' .- M A I A -------------------------------------------------. | The Multimedia Application Integration Architecture | `----------------------------> http://www.linuxdj.com/maia -' --- http://olofson.net --- http://www.reologica.se ---