On 24 December 2015 at 19:25, David Barbour <dmbarbour_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> Live coding is using a powerful language as an HCI. This is opposed to
> using application specific language (predefined forms or widgets, a weak
> CLI language, etc.) that hinder flexible expression or abstraction.
Nice but people live code with little languages all the time don't they?
HTML, fancy DSLs and ixiLang?
Could I argue argue that a a collection of widgets could make up an
extremely powerful language?
Also are you adamant its an HCI concept? I think we're looking at the
interface between system and person these days - not just computer and
person what with dancers and choreographers doing it. Sometimes live
coding takes place without a machine in sight doesn't it? I reckon its
a cybernetics thing...
> I think it's worth separating live coding from its application in
> performance and music. With augmented reality, and internet of things, or
> semantic webs, we could see a much wider applications.
Yep. There's no reason to tangle the two. Leaving things this fuzzy
lets people spout nonsense about them.
--
Read the whole topic here: livecode:
http://lurk.org/r/topic/7aXz9JGpcS1bXv4qkBAdhB
To leave livecode, email livecode_at_group.lurk.org with the following email subject: unsubscribe
Received on Sat Dec 26 2015 - 10:55:06 GMT