16 Dec
2007
16 Dec
'07
11:12 p.m.
On Fri, 14 Dec 2007, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
On Dec 13, 2007, at 8:31 PM, Chris McCormick wrote:
One can dream I guess.
I think that GEM is dataflow-ish, but it is representing OpenGL render chains rather than the physical shapes they generate...
There's no way to stretch any definition of dataflow to call GEM dataflow-ish. Execution order itself is not dataflow. If you just use bang (or equivalently just the "gem" message) then there's no dataflow aspect involved, there is only execution order that is important.
Chris means dreaming about making GEM more dataflowish, not just pretending that it is.
_ _ __ ___ _____ ________ _____________ _____________________ ... | Mathieu Bouchard - tél:+1.514.383.3801, Montréal QC Canada