indeed, that's why I wrote it -- Max and Pd are based on many design principles that are far from universally shared; by making them explicit I might help some readers think about their own different ones -- mine shouldn't be more than a reference point.
cheers Miller > > I hope as many people who read that paper can read it critically. Several > of the ideas contained therein are detrimental and harmful to the > perception and evolution of Pd/Max. Things like: Max isn't a "programming > environment", and even less a "real-world programming environment"; > features are left out because Max users aren't professional programmers; > Max is "lacking any notion of linear control-flow" (whatever that > means???); Max doesn't have scoping because musicians don't need it; the > idea that object-oriented programming is all about inheritance; elegance > in code has nothing to do with making creative music; the computer-science > crowd preaches that reuse of code is essential to communicating knowledge; > Max somehow opposed itself to computer science; "The computer should > ideally feel in the musician's hands like a musical instrument, needing > only to be tuned up and then played" (!!!); etc... well I should put a > (!!!) after each of those phrases. If you need any justification from me > for any item(s) on this list I will provide it (if I did it all upfront, > it could be long like a paper). > > _ _ __ ___ _____ ________ _____________ _____________________ ... > | Mathieu Bouchard - t?l:+1.514.383.3801, Montr?al, Qu?bec > _______________________________________________ > [email protected] mailing list > UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> > http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
