bsoisoi wrote:
I agree, being able to specify interpolation via an inlet message would be great (from my users perspective).
hmm, i am not totally convinced (but actually don't care) as this leads to bloated objects which can just do everything and you specify what they should do via parameters. why do we have objects then?
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.
anyhow, now for something constructive: you can always create an abstraction [tabread_tweaked~] that is like
[inlet~] | [tabread~ $1] | [outlet~]
and use this abstraction. if you later decide that you do want interpolation just make the abstraction to be like
[inlet~] | [tabread4~ $1] | [outlet~]
et voila.
you could argue that then you would have to think of the variability beforehand; bit you would have to do this as well if you are using messages (unless you are up to hunting all the [tabread~] in your patch to add the special message)
fgmasdr IOhannes