Nothing specific, but the current implemtnation has 4 wraparound points (which assumes that interpolation goes up to 4 points) -- seems unnecessarily arbitrary to me.
cheers M On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 12:34:34PM -0400, Mathieu Bouchard wrote: > On Mon, 11 Apr 2011, Miller Puckette wrote: > > >I thought about this for quite some time, but couldn't see that unifying > >the two would bring enough benefit to be worth it. In particular, the > >particular way wraparound is handled in delay lines might change with the > >iplementation, but making the actual storage visible as a table would > >lock us into one implementation. > > Which other implementation(s) did you have in mind ? > > _______________________________________________________________________ > | Mathieu Bouchard ---- tél: +1.514.383.3801 ---- Villeray, Montréal, QC _______________________________________________ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
