On Sat, Oct 6, 2012 at 12:54 AM, IOhannes m zmölnig
<zmoelnig@iem.at> wrote:
On 10/06/2012 10:37 AM, Claude Heiland-Allen wrote:
>
>> count the bangs that [tabplay~] will output via it's 2nd inlet.
>
> For long files, yes.
probably for "intermediate-sized" files.
with "long" files (those that do not easily fit into RAM; or when have a
number of "longish" files, the total of which doesn't fit into RAM), you
are probably better off using [readsf~]'s last outlet, which gives you a
done bang as well, and count that.
>
> For microloops, I'd prefer [wrap~]:
>
[...]
which is nice as well, and tackles the real problem ("i want to loop a
sample N times") rather than a possible implementation ("how can i count
the number of loops (so i know when to stop)".
> (Is [tabplay] clock-aware? it perhaps could be?)
not afaik.
however, in many cases you don't need (sub)sample-accurate timing and
evaluation at block-boundaries is sufficient.
gmd
IOhannes