[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