I agree, being able to specify interpolation via an inlet message
would be great (from my users perspective).
Plus, deciding you want better interpolation (or none at all) in any
given abstraction would not require the touching of code, which is a
big + in my opinion. Sometimes I may want quality, sometimes not, and
other times I don't know yet or might want to change it on the fly.
That's what always bugged me about Reaktor's table object, you have to
right-click on the table in the setup and enable interpolation
manually, which to me is the equivalent and equally annoying to
specifying a different object in Pd. If you have many of these in
your app hunting is not very fun.
Cheers m8s,
~brandon
On Jun 24, 2008, at 10:25 AM, Frank Barknecht wrote:
Hallo,
Hans-Christoph Steiner hat gesagt: // Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
"4" stands for 4-point interpolation, that is true. But there are
many algorithms for 4-point interpolation, as this thread as laid
bare. tabread4~ could also describe something that reads 4 values
and averages them, it could also be the 4th version of tabread~.
Those are all existing naming conventions in Pd.
I'm still fond of using only a single [tabread4~] object and being
able to specify the type of 4-point interpolation to use with a
[interpolate cubic( message or so. Additionally with a "-interpolate
cubic" argument, maybe. Less strain on the global namespace and
backwards compatible.
Ciao
--
Frank Barknecht _
______footils.org__
_______________________________________________
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
_______________________________________________
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
