[PD] better tabread4~
bsoisoi at mac.com
Tue Jun 24 23:12:49 CEST 2008
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.
On Jun 24, 2008, at 10:25 AM, Frank Barknecht wrote:
> 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.
> Frank Barknecht _
> 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...
More information about the Pd-list