[chuck-users] "Or"

Tambet qtvali at gmail.com
Fri Sep 3 18:43:08 EDT 2010

It started from getters-setters and evolved into properties.

ChucK lacks almost all features of nowadays language and that's sad - it
does a real innovation in one aspect, but is 10 years outdated in many
others ..I would really like to see that the language design is seriously
reworked and all kinds of syntactic sugar introduced - especially lambdas
and better forms of iterators.

But stability and functionality should not traded off for that - having
really good virtual machine is more important as there could be different
languages designed to it and that would be only good to ChucK (as long as
those can cooperate).


2010/9/3 Kassen <signal.automatique at gmail.com>

> Joe;
>> If we made 'likely' (and 'unlikely') chuckable that would make it nice:
>>   .70 => likely;  /* also sets 'unlikely' to .30 at the same time */
>  Ok, and this would be system-wide? So I could do this in one shred and
> have it affect others?
> I quite like this idea. It's a new sort of thing, in that it would be a
> key-word that would act as both a variable and a function... but it's
> simple, intuitive and versatile. It would probably be great for live control
> over generative pieces with random component, where we could sort of
> crossfade between two kinds of behaviour.
> I'd like to have this. Actually I'd like to be able to build this sort of
> thing myself, within ChucK.
> Yours,
> Kas.
> _______________________________________________
> chuck-users mailing list
> chuck-users at lists.cs.princeton.edu
> https://lists.cs.princeton.edu/mailman/listinfo/chuck-users
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cs.princeton.edu/pipermail/chuck-users/attachments/20100904/42ccff61/attachment.htm>

More information about the chuck-users mailing list