Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Feature request: selectable top|left passthrough for Arithmetic Operators blocks #46

Open
teknico opened this issue Oct 4, 2019 · 1 comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@teknico
Copy link

teknico commented Oct 4, 2019

The Arithmetic Operators modules are powerful and versatile. However, converting formulas is sometimes difficult because, if an algorithm is selected, the result of the operation is always propagated both to the right and the bottom of a block (reference).

Proposal: convert all right and bottom "arrows" (including the ones next to an output, but excluding the ones next to an input) to three-way selectors that choose whether to propagate the left value, the top value or the operation result.

This will afford the following behaviors:

  • top to right;
  • left to right;
  • result to right;

independently from these others:

  • top to bottom;
  • left to bottom;
  • result to bottom.

This change will make the user interface more crowded but hopefully it'll remain intuitive enough. An invisible way to set this would be good enough, as long as it allows each block to be set independently.

This will greatly increase the versatility of an already powerful series. Thanks.

@david-c14
Copy link
Owner

Interesting idea.

Personally I like the challenge of fitting algorithms into the structure of AO. But I take your point.

I'll think about it, but I have to admit that it would probably not come high on my list of priorities, just because I am working on other things at the moment.

Other things to consider:

It's always worth comparing AO with the FrankBuss Formula module. Sometimes AO is much more efficient, and sometimes the other way round.

Also you can consider using 2 AO-106 with cables, instead of 1 AO-112. (That doesn't give as much flexibility as your suggestion, AND it introduces a single sample delay, which may or may not be a problem depending on the algorithm)

@david-c14 david-c14 added the enhancement New feature or request label Oct 4, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants