Hi Jonas,
Those two approaches are very very similar, really. The biggest
difference is the typing you have to do at first to get things set up,
but that's not very important - more important is the things you'll
have to type again and again during the performance. So maybe it
depends on where your "~" key is on your keyboard ;)
I do tend to use "global" vars quite a lot, but it's not a great
habit. Firstly because it's easy for me to keep using "x" and
accidentally overwrite "x" so I can't access a running synth any more
(the previous "x"), doh. It's great for quickly coding up ideas to
have these one-character variables, but it's not very mnemonic, and in
general it's a bit better for my own thinking (and probably better for
any readers in the audience) if I use arbitrary names like ~fee =
HPF.ar(~chh * ~sproing, ~gerpenv).
Dan
2014-02-14 10:14 GMT+00:00 Jonas Hummel <news_at_jonashummel.de>:
> Hi all,
>
> I am not a fluent SC coder and still pick up a lot from what other people do
> out there or what's to be found on sccode.org.
>
> In a recent project I found myself again wondering on the question of how to
> design the variables for values and functions. So I thought that this
> community may have some good answers on what actually differences,
> advantages or problems of using environment variables (~myvar1 = ... ) vs. a
> dictionary approach (q=(); q.myvar1 = ...) are.
>
> And for live coding purposes: Do you use global vars a lot (x = ...) ?
> or better not because they are limited in number?
>
> I don't have any concrete examples as this is rather a general design
> decision.
> Thanks for your comments!
>
> cheers
>
>
> Jonas
>
Received on Fri Feb 14 2014 - 10:58:24 GMT