[PD] about pd's gui

[Michal Seta]

On Sat, 2003-11-22 at 19:46, Jerome Etienne wrote:

> pd is a graphical language, so a nice gui isn't a luxury.

Isn't adding 'niceties' to existing, working products a luxury?

> it provide good readability, which improve the developpement
> time and even more the maintenance time.

I don't think that 'nice' will accomplish the above.  But I would opt
for more functional.  Segmented patch cords would be welcome (although I
have learnt to live with the way they are now) and inlet/outlet hints
would be a nice aid.  I don't see the need to put a lot effort into
porting the gui into some fashionable graphical toolkit.  Adding some
resources should probably be easier and more intelligent.

As per GUI frontends to patches, the possibilities are already there:
GriPD, python extern (and through python you can use wxWindows, QT, GTK,
SDL, tk, etc), and, of course, writing a separate frontend in _any_
language and communicating via tcp/ip or OSC, or MIDI.

> 
> to have a good readability allow you to understand what you have
> done when you come back way later, allows other people to
> understand your work.

'nice' doesn't mean readable.  Having patcher elements look like Max/MSP
will not allow you to understand patches any better.  I have seen (and
done) max patches that were totally messy and unreadable without moving
things around and trying to figure out what's what.  Readability can be
achieved with style: abstracting and commenting.

> 
> in textual language readability is known to be important 
> for years. some textual language have a poor readibility 
> and are qualified of 'write only' language.

in many cases it's a matter of preference and fuel for 'language wars'.
perl is considered unreadable but many people swear by it.  Go figure. 

cheers
-- ./MiS
	      _
      __  __ (_)___   Michal Seta
     / 	\/  \ _/^ _|
    /  	     V |_  \ @creazone.32k.org
   (___/V\___|_|___/
http://www.[creazone]|[noonereceiving].32k.org