I think the critical distinction between live-coding and other coding is in
the nature of the feedback cycle, but not its duration -- rather, it is in
whether there exists intermediate output, directed at the coder but not at
the end-user. Non-live coding has it, live coding does not.
Both live and non-live coders can work with a very short feedback cycle:
run a test, examine the result, futz with something, run another test.
That's how (pretty much?) everone plays Tidal. However, when you play
Tidal, those intermediate "tests" are part of the output. Indeed there is
no other output.
On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 12:42 PM, David Barbour <dmbarbour_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> On Dec 29, 2015 12:08 AM, "Evan Buswell" <ebuswell_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> > 3) Is coding a function of computers? Are computers special or is code
> special?
>
> Computers are special.
>
> Humans are tool users. We can extend our physical abilities with tools. But
> historically, the only way to operate far beyond our physical reach has
> been to command other humans. This works, but it's laggy, unreliable, and
> tends towards severe inequality between the humans doing the commanding and
> those receiving the commands.
>
> We know from various experiments that even 200ms latency is enough to amply
> destroy the sense of direct control. Immersion in VR or AR requires
> latencies under 20ms. Computers are the only tool that can meet this
> requirement while extending human reach far beyond our physical bodies.
>
> Of course, to leverage computers as tools, we need both computerized
> control over something (music, a smart home, a robotic factory, etc.) and
> we need human control over our computers. Automation has been much slower
> than was hoped for by those envisioning it, but internet of things,
> augmented reality, and semantic web are making gradual progress (and
> occasional leaps). The latter aspect - control of our computers - has been
> intentionally undermined by the computing industry (esp. Microsoft and
> Apple) for economic reasons.
>
> Conventional applications constrain expression, extension, abstraction, and
> composition. Programming languages tackle exactly these concerns, giving
> the programmers control, but are traditionally not exposed to 'users' and
> are rarely designed for live use. Live coding unifies PL and UX principles,
> directly using a programming language as an HCI. PLs can take many forms,
> of course, not limited to textual code. Graphical PLs have been around in
> one form or another since the 1960s, and some people have tried spoken PLs
> with mixed success.
>
> So, computers are special tools and live coding is the way to fully wield
> them.
>
> --
>
> Read the whole topic here: livecode:
> http://lurk.org/r/topic/4JFPD7MDRvzpGASalon17t
>
> To leave livecode, email livecode_at_group.lurk.org with the following email
> subject: unsubscribe
>
--
Jeffrey Benjamin Brown
--
Read the whole topic here: livecode:
http://lurk.org/r/topic/1YIMiTBEcwg4e6Qg0KU2xp
To leave livecode, email livecode_at_group.lurk.org with the following email subject: unsubscribe
Received on Wed Dec 30 2015 - 21:32:48 GMT