On Nov 2, 2006, at 2:08 AM, carmen wrote:
On Thu Nov 02, 2006 at 02:02:52PM +0800, Chris McCormick wrote:
On Wed, Nov 01, 2006 at 10:39:50PM -0500, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
On Wed, 1 Nov 2006, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: I advocate use of consistent syntax all over pd. Consistency is more important than minimality. If pd's syntax is too minimal, it encourages small syntax hacks that aren't portable to the rest of the pd system, such as -y amp(0:100)(0:100).
That is strange, I hadn't seen that before. I also have not seen gridflow before. I should say, then I am talking about things in common usage. There is definitely a lot of stuff shoe-horned into some of those draw and plot boxes. I wonder how to make that stuff work without the new syntax?
I would say that datastructures should be considered amongst things that are "in common usage". It's simply not possible to use datastructures for visualising audio data without the scaling syntax, and I think there's a good reason that Miller made the syntax look like that - it's not possible to do it without some kind of custom syntax like that.
so youre advocating arbitrary microformatting on a per-case basis instead of fixing the pd syntax so its not necessary?
hpoefully i just misread.. how do you generate/parse -y amp(0:100) (0:100) easily. maybe the nonexistent regexp external?
Datastructures are part of the Pd core.
Incidentally, I also think this highlights the need for a poll of the Pd list at some point so we can get some idea of what users are using what externals, abstraction sets, libraries, etc. I would love to see the numbers, and it would probably be useful for Miller to see what is popular about Pd in a quantifiable scientific way.
what about an opt-in usage statistics 'phone home'. initng does this for example.. firefox just does it without even asking..
Funny, I was just thinking about something like that. It would be cool to know how many people are using Pd. If you code it, I'll include it in Pd-extended. Then maybe it could make it into devel or MAIN.
Right now, there have been roughly 17,000 downloads of the last Pd- extended release, according to SourceForge:
http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php? group_id=55736&package_id=76013
I'd like to know how many people use it, and for what.
.hc
I don't quite get the scaling stuff, so I guess its hard to see why it needs to be done that way. Perhaps there could be a scaling standard variable like float x, float y, and float w. It could be an array of 4 values, or two values, a ratio and offset.
I think you should read up on DS some more and try using the scaling yourself.
Another difference between [declare] and data structures/gridflow is that obstensibly, [declare] will be used everywhere, while DS/GF would be a special topic. For special areas, special syntax is perhaps more excusable than something used everywhere.
In my opinion datastructures should stay core to Pd as more and more people create GOP datastructure abstractions for others to use. It's possible to make amazing custom GUIs that will work with vanilla Pd without requiring users to compile/install complicated externals.
is it? that would be great. but i think its currently a pipedream...
Best,
Chris, your friendly neighbourhood DS advocate. ;)
chris@mccormick.cx http://mccormick.cx
PD-dev mailing list PD-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
PD-dev mailing list PD-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The arc of history bends towards justice. - Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.