[chuck-users] static strings and the future

[Scott Hewitt]

Hi,

Regarding documentation a number of years ago there was a
documentation push which resulted in

http://write.flossmanuals.net/chuck/tutorials/

That tends to have more detail than the site but not as much as the books.

Is there a topic you think needs particular attention Joel?

Scott


On 16 January 2018 at 16:46, Joel Matthys <jwmatthys at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi.
>
> It would be good to hear from the devs about what ChucK is up to right now,
> but I want to point out that development hasn't stopped. The GitHub source
> code repo shows quite a few changes were just checked in, including what
> appears to be a new "chuck-engine-2017." I just pulled the changes and I'm
> curious to read the source code and see if there's are new features or a
> performance bump.
>
> I would say that there is a need for improved documentation--always a huge
> problem in FOSS--and the recent Kadenze courses and book are a move in the
> right direction. It would be really nice to have some updates from the devs
> and a way to build the community around ChucK. Maybe that's more on us than
> the devs.
>
> Joel
>
> On 01/13/2018 05:19 AM, mario buoninfante wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I'd like to ask the same question about the development status.
>
> the only thing I can say is that also if the development seems to be a bit
> stuck, on the other side I noticed that they're pushing on the educational
> side (see Kadenze courses), and if you look at the github repository,
> there's been some update in the last 2 years.
>
> but as you guys said, it's important to know what's the plan ;)
>
> it's a couple of years I'm really diving into ChucK and I strongly believe
> that is a good programming language which opens up a lot of possibilities
> that other languages don't.
>
> but at the same time I feel like it's been a bit abandoned (maybe that's a
> huge word, let's say put aside ;) ) and of course using a "tool"  which has
> an "uncertain future" it's not the best thing.
>
> I wish I was able to offer my contribution to the development, but
> unfortunately I'm not really into C/C++, I'm more a "scripting language guy"
> :)
>
> btw, it would be nice to hear what developers and/or other users have to say
> about it.
>
>
> cheers,
>
> Mario
>
>
>
> On 12/01/18 22:14, Gonzalo wrote:
>
> Yes, I'm wondering the same thing. There's a Facebook group
> (https://www.facebook.com/groups/1593843507578422/) but it doesn't look
> super active either.
>
> As far as static strings: I'm pretty sure you just can't have static
> non-primitives. What are you trying to achieve?
>
> Cheers,
> Gonzalo
>
>
> On 13.01.18 00:20, Atte wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> I've been away for a long time and surprised that activity seems to have
> slowed down a lot, both on the development of new releases chuck and the
> life of this list. Am I looking at the wrong places? What's the status of
> chuck development now and in the future?
>
> I really like chuck (mostly the timing and sporking including
> Machine.add()), should I look other places for a language that will privide
> a more secure future? I'm on linux and looked at Csound, Super Collider and
> PD, each has it's challenges in how I work (realtime generative and
> algorithmic MIDI), python seems to have realtime problems (garbage
> collection at random points). Any idea what former chuck users have switched
> to now?
>
> Back to chuck! A problem that I never been able to solve, static strings:
>
> public class A {
>      "b" @=> static string B;
>
>      public static void C(){
>     <<<B>>>;
>      }
> }
>
> That throws an error, how would I go about what I'm trying to do?
>
> Cheers
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> chuck-users mailing list
> chuck-users at lists.cs.princeton.edu
> https://lists.cs.princeton.edu/mailman/listinfo/chuck-users
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> chuck-users mailing list
> chuck-users at lists.cs.princeton.edu
> https://lists.cs.princeton.edu/mailman/listinfo/chuck-users
>