[chuck-users] ChucK on the web: NodeJS / HTML5

henrique matias hems.inlet at gmail.com
Fri Apr 20 12:51:45 EDT 2012

Hum, i couldn't expect less from chuck users. High level talk here.

About the syntax you might be able to workaround the time yielding
thing with a "pre-script-language"

For instance  coffee Script ( The language Tom pointed ), has a
"runtime compiler" that would parse the code and convert to javascript
almost in no time..

On 20 April 2012 16:18, Tom Lieber <tom at alltom.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 6:10 PM, Matt Diamond <mdiamond at jhu.edu> wrote:
>> Has anyone had any experience with using ChucK in a web context? For
>> example, two things I'd be interested in as a web developer:
>> 1) streaming ChucK audio output from a NodeJS server to the browser
>> 2) a javascript client-side ChucK implementation utilizing the Web Audio API
>> Has there been any work on either of these?
> Links to these projects came up on the TOPLAP mailing list (worth
> subscribing and perhaps asking there too):
>  http://livecoder.net/
>  http://www.charlie-roberts.com/gibber/
> Some friends from undergrad made a collaborative browser-based ChucK
> editor that sounds like Noah's, though theirs was also not published.
> Someone should release something!
> At any rate, I've found the JavaScriptAudioNode interface to be fairly
> friendly and somewhat performant:
>  https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/audio/raw-file/tip/webaudio/specification.html
> This experiment of mine works pretty well on my computer, though for
> some reason falls over on Windows without a much wider window size
> that kills interactivity:
>  http://people.csail.mit.edu/tl/vocal/
>  http://people.csail.mit.edu/tl/vocal/audio.js
> It's a port of this ChucK script designed for joystick control:
>  http://smelt.cs.princeton.edu/pieces/JoyOfChant/JoyOfChant.ck
> Anyway, running a virtual machine on top of Javascript in the audio
> callback would probably not work, but if you could compile the code to
> Javascript then you ought to be able to get away with a lot. Maybe
> extend CoffeeScript? (The only reason you'd want the compile step at
> all is that there's no easy way to emulate ChucK's syntax for yielding
> time because Javascript lacks continuation support in most
> implementations.)
> --
> Tom Lieber
> http://AllTom.com/
> http://infinite-sketchpad.com/
> _______________________________________________
> chuck-users mailing list
> chuck-users at lists.cs.princeton.edu
> https://lists.cs.princeton.edu/mailman/listinfo/chuck-users

More information about the chuck-users mailing list