[PD] OT - C++ for reusable dsp lib - or better use C?

Phil Stone pkstone at ucdavis.edu
Sat Feb 25 23:29:21 CET 2012

On 2/25/12 1:20 PM, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
> Le 2012-02-25 à 13:14:00, Phil Stone a écrit :
>> It's well worth watching, all the way through. It was a "eureka" 
>> moment for me -- I now see the potential of "live-coding."
> Ah ok, you mean that you didn't see the potential of live-coding by 
> using PureData ?
> But PureData isn't just about the potential of live-coding. It's also 
> about doing it. Possibly even every time you use it.

IMO, Pd *approaches* this potential of live-coding, but isn't there yet. 
The edit/play dichotomy, and the probability of audio dropouts resulting 
from trying to use both modes simultaneously is a big obstacle to smooth 

I use Pd because it is the best compromise that I have found toward 
achieving this idea-implementation feedback loop for audio/music 
design.  I still maintain a divide between my design phase and my 
performance phase, though; I'd love to see that divide fade away.

I also like programming in "word" languages, and a Supercollider-type 
language with this the one in this video's level of instantaneous, 
round-trip synchronization between code and product would be pretty great.


More information about the Pd-list mailing list