2014-02-10 19:56 GMT+01:00 Johannes Lorenz <[email protected]>: > So you mean to bind the property to a model (instead of a connection, like I > proposed)? This would restrict the user to not use two scale types to control > one model (i.e. one logarithmic, one linear). Does anyone think this > restriction is too restrictive?
Of course an option would be the best solution but for the time being, hardcoding the property for some models (like freq knobs) is less work. However feel free to implement an according context menu action. A hardcoded property still could be used as a hint for the default setting for various models. >> For the actual implementation, you only need to extend >> AutomatableModel::setAutomatedValue() and >> AutomatableModel::controllerValue(). > Ok, I guess the first is for automation tracks and the second is to receive a > value from the controller for my model (e.g. a knob receives a new value), > correct? Yes. controllerValue() is called whenever the value of the model is retrieved using value(). So basically for controllers (unlike automation patterns) it's not a push but pull concept -> the model does not "receive" controller values. Toby ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Androi apps run on BlackBerry 10 Introducing the new BlackBerry 10.2.1 Runtime for Android apps. Now with support for Jelly Bean, Bluetooth, Mapview and more. Get your Android app in front of a whole new audience. Start now. http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=124407151&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ LMMS-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lmms-devel
