On Fri, 2006-11-24 at 21:19 +0000, alex wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-11-24 at 13:21 +0000, Dave Griffiths wrote:
> > nice, I find it more understandable than perl - would you say the language
> > (or the interface to the language underneath) is closer to a musical score
> > than a general purpose language?
>
> Yes I suppose I would. It's not turing complete so I don't know if it's
> fully toplap compliant though.
yes, that was my issue with the lsystem rule coding for a while - but on
further research (mainly the formal rules as arithmetic processor in
Godel Escher Bach) it seems that even the simplest domain specific
languages can be used to express much higher level things.
> I've tried to perform with it twice and not had much luck... I'd like
> to persevere though if you + ade are up for it!
... and it worked very well too to my ears...
for the record I livecoded some audio controlled procedural geometry
defined using turtle operations. very satisfying as it was all from
scratch and I didn't save the script :)
cheers,
dave
Received on Sun Nov 26 2006 - 22:48:46 GMT