Hi,
I've just been lookinjg at the docs for chuck, seems like a good idea.
Seems a bit like sc server?
I'm interested in the system but I'm also intereseted in the einvironment,
As I've mentioned earlier, I beleive that the environment has as much to do
with the
performance as the parsing/execution system..
In chuck I can see it would be beneficial to have the ability to run
multiple windows
holding code fragments that can be cut/paste and 'shredded' etc. allowing a
multitasking fluidity to the
environment. It would be nice to allow users to define chuck files as 3rd
party generators etc
(as in max/pd as both compiled code and as language built subroutines), and
have these to
be easily accessible in the performance environment.
(you may already have this functionality as I didnt dig really deep into the
code stuff)
This may well be a case of adding extra shells to the
system but it could radically effect the usability/performance flow etc
mmmmmmmmm i think i've just realised that you have a project 'audicle' that
is
looking at this sort of stuff hmmmmm... ah well i've written this so I'm
still gonna send it ;)
Tom
http://www.nullpointer.co.uk
http://www.r4nd.org
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ge Wang" <gewang_at_CS.Princeton.EDU>
To: <livecode_at_slab.org>
Sent: Thursday, July 22, 2004 1:15 AM
Subject: Re: [livecode] re: coding from scratch
>
> On Jul 21, 2004, at 11:58 AM, Dave Griffiths wrote:
>
> > I think at the very least we need to come up with some good languages
> > for live programming - maybe even design one for the purpose.
>
> I agree. ChucK currently allows code to be added/changed on the fly,
> you can do this from the command line, or from within the ChucK program,
> which can write new programs on-the-fly. Perry and I are working on
> making this happen at an even finer level (per line/per instruction).
> ChucK is also totally open to new ideas - especially from people like
> all of us live coders.
>
> Also, I am totally down with designing other languages. Perhaps an
> updated version of Forth - the ultimate write-only language! That is
> really what we want (sometimes). write-only. If others are interested,
> let's look into this more!
>
> Environments are also crucial. we have an audicle site:
>
> http://audicle.cs.princeton.edu/
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Best,
> Ge!
>
>
>
Received on Thu Jul 22 2004 - 08:50:44 BST