[PD-ot] could pd be the ideal software?

Chris McCormick chris at mccormick.cx
Tue Jun 20 04:19:03 CEST 2006


On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 04:09:55PM -0400, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
> 
> On Jun 16, 2006, at 7:08 AM, Tim Blechmann wrote:
> 
> and/or object-oriented languages, techniques, debugging tools, etc.   
> Compare that to the amount of human-hours spent on visual programming  
> languages.  Its miniscule in comparison.  So given that, I think that  
> dataflow languages stand up quite well.

I have a feeling that dataflow languages will also be a really nice
fit on massively parallel systems with thousands or even millions of
processors. Imagine if every subpatch or data path in Puredata for
example could be executed on a different CPU. I realise this is not
technically possible due to Pd's design, but is interesting to think
about. In any case, I think Pd would probably not be the best tool for
general purpose dataflow programming since it's so geared towards making
noise and art. Maybe something like Gridflow with a different scheduler?

Chris.

-------------------
chris at mccormick.cx
http://mccormick.cx




More information about the PD-ot mailing list