I think placing ‘requirements’ on to it working would just create more confusion, and so more support requests/bug reports.
(my experience is users report things as bugs, even when they don’t work as they think they should)
the ‘obvious’ solution is to just playback tracks as if this was the first time thru…
so going back to an example
T1 5 bar
T2 2 bar
T3 4 bar
T4 10 bar
if you are on T4, and you play bar 7, then it would play
T1 bar 2
T2 bar 1
T3 bar 3
T4 bar 7
this would at least be consistent… but I do still think people would report it as a bug.
imagine, they had let this sequence play thru 3 times…
they hear something that ‘clashes’ , and want it to play again
… but it reverts back to the 1st play, and now they have to wait 3 iterations to hear it again.
instant bug report : “replaying should playback identically to time before”
it doesn’t matter we can say 'er, but… ’ this was a compromise, at that time, because its not what they want… they will see it as a bug.
also frankly, in the above example, many are going to be confused about why tracks started as they did.
we have seen this quite clearly, then we talk about offsets, and how they adjust start position… many don’t understand why it works as it does, think its a bug that needs fixing - because it’s not as they want.
but if you understand it, it’s perfectly logical.
(for sure, it could be extended, and allow offset editing… but its not a bug)
… its hard, polyrythms/polymeters can be confusing!
anyway, this its all really a moot point,
whilst we can have our thoughts on ‘good solutions’ , its the Squarp Dev team that have to decide.
a) they are very experienced in this area, so will have strong ideas or what works, and not… and also what the user base general expects etc.
b) they know what’s feasible given the current code base.
so Id really encourage you to talk to them…
I think the basic issue of "Ive a long playing sequence, Id like to be able to play back from bar X, whilst editing’ , is something they will appreciate… and by talking to them, perhaps they can come up with other solutions/suggestions we have not covered here.
my thoughts above, are really just an effort to explain what I think are some of the complexities… so hopefully that conversation with Squarp can be more fruitful