John wrote:

> Question: should this code replace oscili (assuming it is correct)?

No. seems like oscili and oscil3 would have different applications.

> Wouks you prefer oscil3 to work with non-power-of-2-plus-1 tables?
> That woudl slow it down a bit more.

Yes. or maybe an option or maybe two opcodes - one for power-of-2(+1) and
one for arbitrary length. Slower is OK with me, since I don't usually work
in real time. Others may disagree, however.