Constant CHOP cooking question

Hi, I would like to use Constant CHOP for some sort of “on-demand data storage” (utilizing its snap parameter to capture current input data). This works nicely, however it keeps cooking at all times as its input is also cooking. I would like to eliminate unnecessary downstream cooking, but adding Selective Null CHOP seems like an overkill in this case.

I would like to ask if it wouldn’t be reasonable to stop cooking Constant CHOP when it isn’t really doing anything? I totally understand it must cook on pulse of snap parameter, but I guess it doesn’t have to cook only because its input is cooking, right?

If I am missing something and this isn’t a good idea, please what would be your go-to solution for such “on-demand data storage”? I have been also thinking about Record CHOP, but it doesn’t have pulse parameter that I could just click to save input channels… Thanks!

constant.1.toe (3.5 KB)

I am still a trying to figure out how to do this simple chop data storing without unnecessary python calls and I feel like the best way to go about this is Constant CHOP. Its snap function works great, but I don’t see a reason why should it propagate downstream cook request when it doesn’t really change anything.

I have tried using Record CHOP for these purposes, but strangely enough, it was also requesting downstream cooking in some situations. (Record CHOP itself wasn’t cooking, but following node was. When I disconnected input from Record CHOP, cooking stopped.) This was therefore also a no-go for me.

There still is a perfectly valid option of doing this in python (by filling in Constant CHOP values manually), but I feel like copying snap function that is already present there :slight_smile: