My interests are similar to Fabrice's. It's not about performance (in the
sense of being on stage), but being able to reconsider and revise a wide
spectrum of the music generation pipeline (from abstract composition to
DSP) in an exploratory manner without having to re-enter data accumulated
along the way or explicitly engineer my own persistence mechanism (saving
the current state to files for resuming play later).
When I'm applying livecoding techniques outside of music, particularly for
game development, making discontinuous edits to control flow logic while
keeping a continuous history of state seems to be particularly important.
Avoiding a re-compile is a minor benefit compared to not manually
re-playing the last minutes/hours of gameplay that lead up to the
interesting state of the fictional world I want to alter a tiny bit. As a
pathological example, think about what it would be like to add a new
building type to SimCity partway through a long play session.
On Jan 10, 2013 2:03 AM, "Fabrice Mogini" <fmogini_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> > >That might well be an interesting distinction and one that could
>> > >perhaps benefit the attempt to define what live coding is.
>> > >I'm not sure myself, but what do people think?
>>
>> > As I see things not even live performance is essential for our kind of
>> > lovecoding. We might be playing to ourselves for our own enjoyment.
>
>
> I use live coding mainly for composing; in that case, the live aspect is
> not about a performance but for bringing
> together improvisation and composition.The real-time feedback while
> editing code is useful to prevent compositional systems from getting out of
> hand and forgetting about perception (eg: serialist techniques).
>
Received on Thu Jan 10 2013 - 19:20:35 GMT