control / number param interface

[catfact]

trying to use paramset, having to make a lot of switches on parameter type (tNUMBER vs tCONTROL) and call different methods. would it not make sense to give the two types the same interface

number: minval, maxval, set
corresponds to
control: min, max, set_raw

^ and incidentally, control.set vs control.raw_set seems unintuitive / ambiguous?
set should be the most commonly used, yeah? which would be, setting unmapped value and triggering update.,
for clarity, would recommned set_mapped, set_unmapped and set as alias to set_unmapped.

---

and, just curious - when would you expect to use a tNUMBER instead of a tCONTROL?

[artfwo]

currently number increases in steps of 1, and control in steps of (max-min)/100.

[tehn]

the delta mechanism is actually the sole reason for NUMBER vs CONTROL.

ie. "tempo" wants delta changes of 1, not 1/100 increments of an arbitrary range from 40-240.

we could otherwise have a flag for CONTROL to do non-mapped delta

re: minval, maxval yes these should just be renamed

[tehn]

set_mapped and set_unmapped are much more intuitive.

i think we can make this work w/o it being breaking?