[PD] better tabread4~

[bsoisoi]

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 at iem.at mailing list
> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-list/attachments/20080624/7ec46763/attachment.htm>