How is that supposed to work? How should the sample reach a silence level when it's never ramped down?
There are already better ways to solve this which are partly used e.g. when a sample ends on itself.

Like I said before--use the 'points of silence'. Essentially all audio clips have them.
The algorithm just looks up incoming 'dead zones' in the clip's output--there are literally thousands of these potential points in a sample.

So you wouldn't even use the Ramp-Down--you'd just cut off the sample while its amplitude is at the dead point. This eliminates the NEED for ramping and will stop any 'pops' as well. This is a fact of audio. If there's a 'pop' at the end of a sound, one doesn't need to add a 'fade-out', they just need to cutoff the sample at a spot where the amplitude's near-zero and pops won't be heard.

You know what I mean--right?

Essentially all audio clips have them.

I can't recall one time where I came across a sample with no zero-crossing.
(Except maybe a square wave? You'd never hear a pop from a cut square wave anyway.) In the extremely-unlikely event someone actually needs a sound with no zero-crossing, the feature could just be disabled.

And from all my experience with audio recording/editing--yes, a zero-crossing will do. The reason a pop occurs is because there's a difference in amplitude between the current sound and its abruptly cut state. If the sound is cut at a zero-crossing (or somewhere near-enough), there's no great difference in
amplitude to begin with, so how can a pop still occur?

I'm not saying REPLACE the ramping with this. I'm just suggesting this be added as an alternative 'pop control'. Because as far as I can tell, it will do the job better 99.9% of the time, especially with higher quality samples.

I can't recall one time where I came across a sample with no zero-crossing.

Anyway, I've had enough of this and aleady said that there are better methods that are less arbitrary. -> Closed.