[chuck-users] how is this "on the fly"?
signal.automatique at gmail.com
Tue Sep 18 04:43:48 EDT 2007
> This has gone off-topic enough.
Speaking just for myself; I don't really mind a certain amount of off-topic
discussion. ChucK doesn't exist in a vacuum nor do we. Some discussion about
interfacing with other languages or even how ChucK compares to other
languages, how it relates to devices, how we ourselves perform or compose
and how we relate to other musicians/artists/engineers seem unavoidable. I
would even say that because of the nature of ChucK it would be cause for
grave concern if discussions didn't branch out from time to time.
I don't think the development of ChucK (and the Audicle's) is just about
implementation (for some) and bug reports/feature suggestions (for the
rest); it's also about establishing what all of this is good for and how we
want to use it. Writing one's own instrument inherently leads to deep
questions about what we think a instrument is, what music is, perhaps even
who we ourselves are, on some level.
What I do mind is that here this discussion, through some combination of
factors, has become unpleasant and because of that has also stopped being
I'd like to suggest backing up a bit, attempt to (re)establish clearly what
the real questions are here and go from there.
*I realise I have no authority to tell anyone what to do (nor would I want
this!), this is just a friendly suggestion.
*I hope everyone is well and in a situation where pleasant walks with fresh
air are a option.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the chuck-users