I wonder if I'm falling into the trap where a moderately interesting article with something clearly misleading about it makes me want to correct things. "Drives

I wonder if I'm falling into the trap where a moderately interesting article with something clearly misleading about it makes me want to correct things. "Drives engagement" I suppose (: But yeah, please don't call this lerping, as others have mentioned. Real lerp is one of a a whole constellation of easing functions[1][2], and indeed playing with variations of "how does f(t) vary from 0–1 as t varies from 0–1" is super useful in all sorts of contexts. But "get X% closer to the (moving) target every frame" is a more complicated thing. It is not just a f(t) easing function, even if the math overlaps. In fact, this confusion has already had articles written about it[3] so I swear it's not just me! I don't think the approach mentioned in TFA is wrong per-se. Situations vary, and it can be useful. But there is enough terminology confusion in CS already. One downside of the approach: you never know _when_ you'll reach your target. Also, especially with the slider example, the feedback feels much more "sloppy." I much prefer the tighter-feeling simple version. But in some cases, like when an enemy is chasing you in a video game, it can be a useful simple-to-implement technique. Be sure to cap your min/max velocities, though. [1] https://github.com/Michaelangel007/easing https://github.com/Michaelangel007/easing [2] https://easings.net/ https://easings.net/ (CSS-centric) [3] https://medium.com/swlh/youre-using-lerp-wrong-73579052a3c3 https://medium.com/swlh/youre-using-lerp-wrong-73579052a3c3