[PD] max msp vs pd

Tim Blechmann TimBlechmann at gmx.net
Tue Nov 1 14:46:34 CET 2005

> I totally agree!  Pd can be a programming platform, it does not need
> to be just an application.  All great programming platforms are
> written in themselves: C, Java, Lisp, SmallTalk, etc. so why not Pd
> too?  It needs some work to accomplish this, but it is within reach.

one has to distinguish between the language and the standard library:
in most languages the standard library is written in the language
itself, although there are exceptions.
the interpreter/compiler may be written in the language, but not
necessarily ...

some examples:
- the emacs lisp interpreter is written in c
- parts of the python library are written in c due to performance
- parts of the libc are written in assembler due to performance reasons

maybe you can write a pd interpreter in pd ... but i think it will be
10 to 100 times slower than writing it in c or rewriting it in c++.
currently there are lots of language features missing in pd
(e.g. constructors / destructors of patches, data encapsulation) and i
doubt that pd will ever have these features ...

cheers ... tim

mailto:TimBlechmann at gmx.de    ICQ: 96771783

latest mp3: kMW.mp3

latest cd: Goh Lee Kwang & Tim Blechmann: Drone

After one look at this planet any visitor from outer space 
would say "I want to see the manager."
				      William S. Burroughs

More information about the Pd-list mailing list