[PD] Re: pure == slow, impure == fast ? was purepd

[derek holzer]

Frank Barknecht wrote:

> I don't want to forbid using externals at all, using - and writing -
> externals is as much part of Pd as patching is. However an external is
> a black box. Unless you know C, you cannot change its behaviour, even
> if you only want to add a little feature. Also seeing the algorithm at
> work in a graphical format can help with understanding it. You don't
> even need a help patch to see, how many abstractions work. 

I'm in total agreement here. One thing that makes PD accessible to 
otherwise non-programmers is the difference between a written syntax and 
a visual one. And more often than not, artists think visually. Laying 
out more of the basic, underlying structure of PD in a visual form , and 
allowing them to make changes in it visually, DOES help them understand 
it better.

> Unfortunatly there is nothing that can replace [pool] and [OSC] in Pd
> yet, and I don't want to ditch OSC support in RRADical and I cannot
> ditch [pool], which is a constant pool of trouble for non-technically
> inclined users. :(

Perhaps [col] is a possibility? I don't know if it can replicate all the 
functionality of [pool], but it is easier to compile. It's still an 
external, however, and it would be great to see this kind of stuff 
handled more easily in PD some day.

best,
d.

--
http://umatic.nl