On 8 Jul 2006, at 00:20, alex wrote:
> Also, these libraries of code that we build up, the starting points
> and
> "pre-prepared scripts." Maybe we should think of this more as long
> term
> memory. If so, then going through these old scripts is analogous to
> dreaming. By finding common patterns running through old scripts
> we can
> dream up new syntax and semantics that make the patterns more
> explicitly
> expressible.
My knowledge of music is pretty limited, but I think Jazz "standards"
might possibly be a useful comparison. Something you (and the other
musicians you are performing with) can start from, return to, and
generally improvise around without having to start from scratch.
I'm sure some people might see using libraries as less "live", but if
the libraries consist of discoveries and experience from live coding
then they still represent live code, code written live, and will help
more and more complex live code to be written. In a way it is just a
single program (or system) being written over a number of
performances rather than starting from scratch each time. So tour-
orientated coding rather than gig-oriented coding.
The long term memory comparison is a good one. Treating performance
as exploratory coding on top of existing achievements, finding
(design) patterns and robustifying them as part of a library is also
comparable to developing a musical style or a canon, concretised in
code. Possibly the library is a kind of score, but a very
indeterminate and unstable one.
- Rob.
Received on Sat Jul 08 2006 - 12:26:43 BST