Re: [microsound] [ot] development environment

[Michal Seta <mis@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

vze26m98 <vze26m98@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> Michal Seta wrote on 1/27/05:
> 
> >"In computer programming, dataflow languages are a class of
> >programming languages that model the program, conceptually if not
> >physically, as a directed graph of the data flowing between
> >operations. Dataflow languages share some features of functional
> >languages, and were generally developed in order to bring some
> >functional concepts to a language more suitable for numeric
> >processing." 
> >
> >Perhaps some definitions have changed since 1993.
> 
> Michael-
> 
> I don't see how your quote supports an argument for a changed definition
> of data-flow languages.  This seems like a classic definition of
> data-flow and one that Dannenberg wouldn't disagree with either.  

ok, sorry, I snipped too much of the Dannenberg quote.  Relevant
portion included below for your convenience.

"The term "data-flow" is not a good description of Max except for the
intuition. Data-flow computers and languages are based on the idea that
(parallel) computations can be synchronized by data. For example, an
addition operator would wait for its two operands before adding them.
Note that this is not at all how Max works. I will not argue that Max
should work this way, but since it doesn't, one should not call it a
data-flow language. I think "patch language" or "visual programming
language" are better terms."

Not that I have something against Mr Dannenberg but the definition on
wikipedia (if one can consider it a reliable resource) is a little
more general than Mr Dannenberg's pedantic categorization.

../MiS


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: microsound-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: microsound-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
website: http://www.microsound.org