Re: [microsound] herbs&spice and everything nice

[alex <alex@xxxxxxxx>]

On Sun, 2002-02-03 at 20:36, paul webb wrote:
> I didn't think the designer used any CODE or did any
> coding with MAX  but  layed out and connected 
> networks of visual processes and componants- (which
> gets translated/compiled into computer code). So thats
> more the 'ARCHECTURE' of these processes.

i'm not sure which designer you are refering too (kim's mailer seems to
lose the thread context, maybe i missed something).

but to my mind my code is

a) laid out - i am careful to make the code beautiful to look at (to
me), also with seperation into different files/objects, etc
b) connected networks - all the 'compositional' programs i write have
the ability to talk to all my other compositional programs via homegrown
protocol over tcp/ip
c) gets translated/compiled into computer code - although it's almost
all Perl, that a very human language that gets interpreted into 0's and
1's later.

i don't know what you mean by 'visual processes'.  i don't think a box
with connectors represents a visual process any more than a block or
class of code.  but i am not a 'visual' person.  when i have briefly
experimented with pure-data, i understood it as another programming
language with certain strengths and weaknesses.  i find textual
languages easier and faster for what i do. 

i don't particularly relate to the architecture metaphor and am not sure
if it fits in my case, but i sometimes like to think of my code in terms
of structure that creates structure.

alex