[PD] FLOSS book Lists chapter

[Andy Farnell]

On Wed, 16 Feb 2011 16:55:24 -0500 (EST)
Mathieu Bouchard <matju at artengine.ca> wrote:


> I don't see how the sentence « those diagrams are source code » doesn't 
> say that there's (almost) a one-to-one correspondence.

Yikes, I tried running that through De Morgans 
What is it you _do_ see there? Or does the law of the excluded 
middle prevent us from straying there? :)

 
> But the one-to-one correspondence isn't exact. I could make a list of ways 
> in which it isn't. 

Please, a list I'd like to see out of curiosity when you have a mo.
I thought about that long and hard, mainly it was things like
ambiguous connections where filaments cross over another
object inlet, or horror of horrors, identical objects copied
on top of each other and wired in place...I've been caught out
that way before.

> Nevertheless, with a little care, a screenshot can be 
> made in a way that can be read by someone that can repatch it if the .pd 
> file itself has not been published.

I'll be honest it took a _lot_ of care. Out of well over 1000 diagrams
one or two ambiguities have raised peoples annoyance enough to email
me a "complaint". That's quite a good record I think, but I spent
many hours re-arranging objects and coords to get clear and unambiguous
patches. What some recognise as my style now was heavily influenced by
the writing and the need to have patches unambiguously read by eyes other
than my own.


> Now, what does it have to do with portability and with functional 
> equivalence of multiple implementations of pd ?
> 
> > In interpreting it further one might say "The diagram is the sound", at 
> > least that has been my hope for what is to be taken as an appeal to a 
> > visual markup for sound in "Designing Sound" *. So far it seems to have 
> > worked out well.
> 
> When you say "the diagram is the sound", what do you make of all those 
> patches that interactively produce sound, and thus can't be directly 
> thought to be the sound, but instead, to be a relationship between the 
> input and the sound ?


Exactly as you say so succinctly, these are potential sounds, without the
necessary performance parameters, ergo the relation between a parameter set 
and realised sounds. This is what I call deferred form, or for Rocchesso & 
Polotti, an unrealised sounding object. Indeed, I define that as one of the 
essential arts of procedural audio, the understanding of potentiality. 

> >>> and one cannot use Pd to write books, teach or otherwise share dataflow
> >>> programs in a purely visual way.
> >> I'm following even less...
> >
> > Not sure how to help, because not sure where you fell off there. Seems 
> > obvious to me that where a picture captures a sound in its entirety it 
> > is a powerful pedagogical device. By "purely" I meant sole/only way.
> 
> It's that at that point the sentence still seems to be about portability 
> and functional equivalence. How are they necessary to prevent the slogan 
> from failing, and to make Pd usable to write books, etc. ?

Teaching requires clear, undistorted communication. If that communication
fails, because the machine or the interpreter does not convey your
intentions to the student, then the lesson fails. You could still
keep part of your slogan, perhaps modify it to "The diagram is a program".
Just maybe not the same program as mine.

best,

a.

> 
> > Actually neither right now, tis Miller Vanilla with a little extra 
> > goodness by Amaury Hazan and Paul Brossier to make it work on those 
> > nasty iThings. Though what we call RjDj as a product rather than 
> > software base is now in its adolescence and may assume new forms with 
> > ZenGarden and/or LibPd and/or other frameworks AFAIK. You need to ask 
> > Martin Roth who is now in the captains seat for technology there.
> 
> Ok, thanks.
> 
>   _______________________________________________________________________
> | Mathieu Bouchard ---- tél: +1.514.383.3801 ---- Villeray, Montréal, QC


-- 
Andy Farnell <padawan12 at obiwannabe.co.uk>