18 Dec
2002
18 Dec
'02
10:40 a.m.
On Wednesday 18 December 2002 14.46, Steve Harris wrote:
On Wed, Dec 18, 2002 at 12:47:21 +0100, David Olofson
wrote:
Yes. That applies to lots of other details as well. We can't finalize
anything before we've seen it in action.
//David Olofson - Programmer, Composer, Open Source Advocate
.- The Return of Audiality! --------------------------------.
| Free/Open Source Audio Engine for use in Games or Studio. |
| RT and off-line synth. Scripting. Sample accurate timing. |
`---------------------------> http://olofson.net/audiality -'
--- http://olofson.net --- http://www.reologica.se ---
On Wednesday 18 December 2002 11.16, Steve Harris
wrote:
[...]
OK, I'd have to construct an inner loop to see which was cleaner,
but I wont be happy with the API until I've tried coding against it
anyway.
I think this is an open issue. I dont see any point in having anythign other
than ramp, and
/maybe/ set, but it just seems like a ramp with a duration of 0
to me.
Yeah - but that's a special case on the receiving end. SET allows
you to test for zero duration when sending events. (I've
explained elsewhere why I think that's a good idea.)