[chuck-users] FLOSS (user editable) manual for ChucK

[Adam Tindale]

Wise words again Kas.

I support your sentiment about making the docs clear to a teenager but
we have to stay true to the information. The nice thing about the new
system is that we can try it and if we don't like it we just roll back
the version and no harm is done.

I think we may include a section of books to read to bring someone up
to speed on the concepts. You may have noticed that instead of doing a
full tour of Windows the front of the manual gives links to a screen
tour to get started with ChucK. We could do the dsp math version of
that.

For a teenager we may just want to included more examples as well. I
would like to start putting all of the code inline in the
documentation. I am also dreaming of the day when every ugen gets an
example. Maybe also the Standard Libraries. The examples will address
your concerns about being clear about what all the language features
are good for.

I like your ideas about including Smirk. I think we also need to
include the chuck shell, and then a brief tutorial or disciption on
the miniaudicle. Maybe audicle too, though my understanding is that it
isn't used very much.

--art

2009/12/16 Kassen <signal.automatique at gmail.com>:
> I added a section titled "extending ChucK" at the end of the manual and
> moved the chapter on LicK there. This is meant to avoid obscuring the line
> between what is and isn't a part of ChucK for new users, who will quite
> likely already be feeling a bit overwhelmed. Similar initiatives like SMIRK
> and SMULE could find a introduction there too, as could Steve's notes on
> building UGens using Faust and potential future notes on dealing with the
> source itself, in case somebody would feel up for that.
>
> I'm close to calling it a night. Some notes; this is a great initiative, it
> clearly works and it's a lot of fun. This is much, much preferable to Adam
> going at it alone, chiefly because Adam's time, like everyone's, is limited.
> It still needs a lot of work though. There are still big gaps and I noted
> some spots where the explanation may be 100% correct but would also be
> utterly incomprehensible to anyone without a background in math. I'd like to
> suggest that this text should be readable to a teenager with a passion for
> sound/music and a interest in computers who may not have a formal background
> in either. I think this might lead to starting a description with a informal
> introduction and perhaps a analogy that may be followed by "programmers
> would call this [formal description goes here]". I'm not talking about
> "dumbing things down" here, more about a clear explanation of why we are
> introducing a subject to make it evident why it will be worthwhile to read
> about it. Once it's clear what things are good for and how they are unlike
> other things it will hopefully also be clear that it'll be useful to learn a
> specialised vocabulary to talk about them.
>
> Yours,
> Kas.
>
> _______________________________________________
> chuck-users mailing list
> chuck-users at lists.cs.princeton.edu
> https://lists.cs.princeton.edu/mailman/listinfo/chuck-users
>
>