[PD] Anybody still interested in pd-scheme?

Larry Troxler lt at westnet.com
Tue Dec 31 02:08:53 CET 2002

Orm Finnendahl wrote:
> Hi Larry,
> well, I'm not really using it anymore although I find extensibility
> through scheme *very* useful. It's more that I don't like to fool
> around with too many interpreters and siod definitely wouldn't be my
> first choice as it is not maintained anymore. Did you think about some
> integration with guile? I guess that way maybe the full functionality
> of common music could be available from within pd and vice
> versa. Right now I'm interfacing using files or a combination of
> netsend/netreceive and named pipes but I could imagine a somewhat
> tighter integration.

I agree that SIOD isn't a best choice. I picked that one mainly because
it didn't take much time to figure out how to interface to it. I was
very easy. But as you have said in the past, not too many people are
using it and it isn't standard Scheme - there are some differences and

Since CM now runs in Guile, it would be interesting to take the effort
now to use Guile instead.

What have you done with PD and CM so far? It sounds like you are
succesfully using them together on some level.

This is getting seriously off-topic now, but one question that arises
whenever I think of interfacing some other program to CM, whether via
pipes or sockets, is how to keep the existing listener so that one can
interact with CM from a terminal or from xemacs, while at the same time
allowing the Lisp to evaluate forms coming in over a pipe or socket (and
then to send the result back to the appropriate destination). I imagine
that this can be accomplished in all current implementations, by writing
a custom REPL that listens to both stdin and a socket (or whatever),
but  I haven't seen any examples of such a thing. I am just wondering
whether you have thought of this.

Larry Troxler

More information about the Pd-list mailing list