Thanks for clearing that up, Chris - appreciated.
On 19 March 2014 14:30, Chris Vienneau <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Martin,
>
>
>
> Graphical programming/data flow graphs are not a programming methodology. ICE
> is based on a functional style programming like the type you see in Scheme,
> Clojure from Google, and even Lisp. This methodology was very much out of
> style in the object oriented C++ world of the 90s. Bringing it back in ICE
> was what I was talking about as what was novel (i.e. not the standard
> practice) and Paul can correct me if I am wrong but Fabric uses a functional
> approach to their programming. Bifrost uses the same functional approach with
> data-flow which is the way to get parallelism with big data sets.
>
>
>
> So to call bullshit on your bullshit call: ICE, Fabric, and Bifrost are
> leveraging programming methodologies that started in the 60s and are owned by
> no one. These methodologies did fall out of favor in the big C++ object
> oriented desktop adventure and the move back to the big data / cloud world
> has brought them back which is great as the data in film and games is growing
> year by year and we need to find way to separate the data and functions.
> Fabric started out on their own with a clean slate and nothing I said implied
> differently.
>
>
>
> cv/
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: [email protected]
> [[email protected]] on behalf of Martin Chatterjee
> [[email protected]]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2014 1:42 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: "Top List of ICE Nodes That Cover 80% of What You Do With The
> Toolset"
>
> Chris,
>
> (...) ICE was derived from a very novel programming methodology that had
> fallen out of favor and which is why Fabric can start up with no harm of IP
> infringement on ICE. (...)
>
> Excuse me, say what? I'm so calling 'bullshit' on that statement.
>
> I don't even know where to begin...
>
> a.) Autodesk surely did not invent the concepts of graphical programming/data
> flow graphs.
> b.) these concepts definitely did not fall out of favor anywhere
> c.) your implication that the technology behind Fabric Engine is essentially
> a v2.0 of ICE (and therefore your indirect accusation that the Fabric team
> simply took the groundwork for their engine with them when they left
> Autodesk) is ridiculous to put it mildly.
>
>
> -M
>
>
>
> --
> Martin Chatterjee
>
> [ Freelance Technical Director ]
> [ http://www.chatterjee.de<http://www.chatterjee.de/> ]
> [ https://vimeo.com/chatterjee ]
>
