[PD] [psql] object hand-holding

Chris McCormick chris at mccormick.cx
Fri Dec 14 02:31:58 CET 2007

On Thu, Dec 13, 2007 at 03:12:18PM -0500, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Dec 2007, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
> >i don't claim that Gem is a good example. however, i also don't see how 
> >the data-flow vs control-flow is especially bad in Gem.
> As long as you pass a "gem" message around that is only a pointer to a 
> shared state that all objects modify, it's all explicit control-flow all 
> over the place. The contents of the "gem" messages doesn't matter at all, 
> and the only thing that matters is the order in which the messages are 
> sent. That's 100% controlflow and 0% dataflow.

It would be way cool if gem was truly dataflow, with the [cube] or another
geometry source at the top of the stack and then geometry/colour/texture
modifiers all the way down until a [render] object. Imagine doing audio
style filtering on geometry streams.

One can dream I guess.



PS This is not a criticism of Mark, IOhannes, Chris's work on Gem - it's
a great library and I love using it! Thanks for all your hard work.


More information about the Pd-list mailing list