Mat Schaffer:
No, you have to determine the dependencies and dependency order by hand. This is my number one feature request, to have a proper namespace and import mechanism.
Any idea if this is getting worked on? It seems like ChucK development is a little slow judging from the dev mailing list traffic.
I don't know.
Only public classes are shared. You can add static fields & methods to public classes.
Where's the deference for how to define static fields? Can you have static methods too? That might be good enough.
- Is there a way to pass functions as arguments to another function or return a function? Also, are fun's proper closures or am I just getting lucky? I was thinking maybe I could use functional style programming to build things like arpeggiations. If this is totally overkill let me know :)
No. As you may have seen, LiCK uses functors to approximate function arguments/closures. Feature request #2. :)
Yeah, is there an example somewhere on how to use those? The `Object @ default` makes no sense to me :)
http://github.com/heuermh/lick/blob/master/Loops.ck has static fields and methods, and uses Procedure to build composite loops class Kick extends Procedure { fun void run() { // make kick sound } } class Snare extends Procedure { fun void run() { // make snare sound } } Kick kick; Snare snare; Loops.append(Loops.append(kick, 200::ms), Loops.append(snare, 200::ms))) @=> Procedure beat; Loops.loop(beat, 2) @=> Procedure measure; Loops.loop(measure, 4) @=> Procedure verse; Loops.append(verse, Loops.append(verse, Loops.append(chorus, Loops.append(verse, chorus)))) @=> Procedure song; song.run(); But yeah the syntax is icky. michael