On Mon, 9 Feb 2009, Chris McCormick wrote:
Almost every modern language has at least one of these basic features,
and that is why I still stubbornly refuse to call Pd a programming
language. It may be turing complete, but it's not useful for general
purpose programming. It definately could be though, and the irony is
that if it supported all of these general programming language features,
it would be a lot easier to build synthesizers too.
That irony is also the reason why special-purpose programming languages
are less adapted to survive than special-purpose libraries (in
general-purpose programming languages) are.
It's also why pretty much any special-purpose computer died or evolved
into a general-purpose computer, long long ago. Even general-purpose CPUs
in special-purpose devices encourage the conversion of that device into a
general-purpose device. Look at mobile "phones"... or any game console
running Linux.
But there are people who still want to believe in it. It led to a flurry
of so-called "web programming languages", which are basically
undistinguishable from non-web programming languages.
Note that I criticize it because I love it. :)
But how many people don't understand that?
(If you criticise it, it must be because you Hate Freedom!)
_ _ __ ___ _____ ________ _____________ _____________________ ...
| Mathieu Bouchard - tél:+1.514.383.3801, Montréal, Québec
_______________________________________________
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
