Be

> Unreliable annotation is IMHO worse than none. I agree. I thought we had planned to hide this feature behind a hidden preference that isn't in the preferences GUI until...

I tested this with a jazz track which is 140 BPM for most of the track and gradually accelerates to 185 BPM by the end. It was really cool to...

Oh, sorry, I think we're talking about different things. I think the behavior you're looking for already exists with `reloop_toggle`.

That may be able to be implemented already in JS with a hack setting `loop_out` a calculated offset from `loop_in`... but why? What benefit does that add? Copying other DJ...

Looking at the [documentation for the DDJ-400 mapping](https://manual.mixxx.org/2.3/en/hardware/controllers/pioneer_ddj_400.html#deck-sections-p-6), it is already possible to set a 4 beat loop by adjusting beatloop_size and pressing the `ACTIVATE LOOP` button... so what is...

I'm still not getting the point of this new ControlObject nor the other ideas proposed. How are any of these better than what already exists? > We have no other...

Thank you for explaining that. I don't think there is a way to do that currently. Creating a loop while the track is playing without enabling it is not something...

> The new feature shall use loop_in + reloop_toggle `loop_in` and `reloop_toggle` already exist so I'm unclear what you are suggesting. I do not agree that this MIDI message that...

Do you mean that you propose that `loop_in` creates a disabled loop with a size taken from `beatloop_size`? I don't think `loop_in` and `loop_out` should use `beatloop_size`; their purpose is...

> The original use-case for setting the loop boundaries is not affected in any ways. This isn't entirely accurate because there would be a deactivated loop shown on the waveforms...