I understand the haiku analogy is about code being short, eloquent and saying what needs to be said in relatively few words.
To be honest, programming is much like actual language in that it relies on layers and layers of abstraction before it can actually be deciphered. If you consider a simple word like 'walk', this represents a number of actions, putting one foot in front of the other, responding to obstacles you come in to and the rather complex process of standing upright. You can attach other words to it and say things like 'walk quickly north' these are arguments, and again, require an understanding of other things before you can interpret them as an instruction.
This is largely the case with PD libraries (and other libraries, for that matter). Even the basic package is very far removed from the binary your computer actually 'understands'. It goes through the process of interpreting a text file for you to see the patch, returning that to a text file, moving through the code that represents pd, operating system etc. until it's just binary.
So you're using a heck of a lot of other people's work using pd vanilla. do you understand how your OS works? Would you rather have one you can build yourself? You'd know how it works, then.
Also if we're talking programming philosophy, I may as well write a 'programming haiku'
Walk towards the sea
Stop walking when you get there
It's too cold for that
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2010 23:01:41 -0500
From: matju@artengine.ca
To: chris@mccormick.cx
CC: pd-list@iem.at
Subject: Re: [PD] PD OOP?
On Sat, 18 Dec 2010, Chris McCormick wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 12:10:24PM -0500, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
>> expressing yourself at an appropriate level of understanding, but
> The appropriate level of understanding is the level at which people hear the
> noise and want to party. Is there any more important level? Of course not.
I'm talking about the manner of patching for making the noises the way you
want and keep it manageable, etc.
> I don't know of a good way to quantify "how much are you compensating?"
I don't know either...
> As for "learn kludgy workarounds," I probably do that less in reality than I
> seem to do in your imagination.
I don't know.
> This might sound terribly lazy and self serving to you,
Oh, being lazy and self serving is not necessarily a bad thing !
>>> It's like writing a haiku.
>> Haikus don't get any work done.
> Haha! Wow. The statement is technically correct.
;)
>> (And I'm not even convinced that they _say_ anything either !)
> Maybe the problem isn't with the haikus.
Maybe it's not a problem. (I didn't say it is.)
>> And if you cared about getting patches to remain as small as they can be,
>> you'd care a lot more about externals than you do.
> At which point did I say I cared about getting patches to remain as small as
> they can be?
It's the "it's like
writing a haiku" analogy
that confused me.
_______________________________________________________________________
| Mathieu Bouchard ---- tél: +1.514.383.3801 ---- Villeray, Montréal, QC
_______________________________________________
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list