Fixes #109 by adding SCALE ops for IN and PARAM #124
Closed
Conversation
Except in pattern / tracker mode, which would require a refactor.
|
I did not solicit the community for a name for this operator. It's possible people would prefer MAP. |
|
There's already precedent for scale meaning scaling a value based on a range in the SCALE op. I'm for renaming SCALE to MAP but that would be a breaking change. |
Syntax: IN.SCALE -100 100 All future calls to IN will scale linearly to between -100 and 100.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
What does this PR do?
Adds two new operators,
IN.SCALEandPARAM.SCALESyntax: IN.SCALE -100 100
All future calls to IN will scale linearly to between -100 and 100.
Provide links to any related discussion on lines.
https://llllllll.co/t/new-teletype-operators-and-features/9076
How should this be manually tested?
Set various PARAM.SCALE values and turn the knob around.
Any background context you want to provide?
Lays the groundwork for CAL calibration operators.
I have,