Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoff Waddington
See, there's always somethin' 
Back to the drawing board |
Sorry
Quote:
Hmmm...
Thinking about this, RotaryB is your friend here.
|
....but then you give up the lovely acceleration you've just implemented.
Thinking about the way the encoders originally worked (TypeA). At that time they must have still been sending out the range of values they do now, but CSI was just ignoring the changes and getting on with things. You even had a proto-acceleration model based on the rate that the ticks were received.
For parameters with a stepped definition, do the same thing now. Ignore the fact that different messages are being received according to how fast the control is turned and just let the ticks step through the values. If a ticks per step definition can be worked into it, great.
About Shift. Two hands = bad.