I also think that megaobjects that accept many messages/attributes
become more like application preferences rather than programming, and
that usually limits the possibilities. For example, in C, a function
with more than 5 parameters starts to get quite ugly and unwieldy.
In LISP, which Max's list handling is modeled after, it is also not
good form to have many attributes in a single function.
Objectclasses in object-oriented languages like Java, etc. accept
many messages, but I think that Max is more like a functional
language than an object-oriented one, (but somewhere in between).
I'm not saying I have the answer (yet? :) but this for me, thinking
about these kinds of things makes for a more intuitive and fluid
programming language.
(and when I say "Max" here, I am talking Max family, which includes Pd).
.hc
On Dec 6, 2007, at 2:38 PM, vade wrote:
You can do both within jitter, anything that is an attribute is by
virtue of being an attribute also a message - so you can send it
via loadbang, loadmess or whenever/however you want, so its up to
you to choose how you want your patch to work :)On Dec 6, 2007, at 2:16 PM, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
icely said, hopefully you can drum up more support for Gem. One thing I think it really great about Gem is that is remains strongly visual. When getting heavy into jitter, the patches look like you are writing in C++ with boxes around it. What I would really like to see is all those naming and attribute features represented in a visual way, rather than just long lines of text like in Jitter. THen if you want to write text-based code, you can use luagl, etc.
All information should be free. - the hacker ethic