|
|
View previous topic :: View next topic
|
| Author |
Message |
Broco
Joined: 05 Dec 2006
Location: Headquarters
|
 Posted: Sat Feb 10, 2007 4:15 am |
  |
|
This is pretty great. My elegance-meter is going to 11!
I would've used a different operator to advance time (unless there's a hidden symmetry with the normal usage I'm not seeing), but that's a quibble.
| Mr. Business wrote: |
| Oh my, this looks very similar to C, but it's backwards. |
This is actually extremely different from C. C's model is running algorithms on memory, Chuck's model is plugging streams into one another (and the C-like aspects are only as a help for secondary tasks). C is intrinsically single-threaded, but a Chuck program can potentially bring into existence a dozen threads at once (but you don't have to worry about it, that's all abstracted away for you).
It so happens that you can view a C-style variable as the fixed input or output of a stream, which is why they reused the => operator for them, but the streams are actually much more powerful than that. Instead of being fixed until you change it like in C, a "variable" can vary in time according to a mathematical function (like say a sine wave) or a predefined file of samples you load. Then you can stream several inputs into one output and use that as a new input for another thing.
Fuck, this is awesome. Now that I know about it, it seems like the totally simple and natural way to do sampling-related tasks; which is of course the mark of genius. |
|
| Unfilter / Back to top |
|
 |
Broco
Joined: 05 Dec 2006
Location: Headquarters
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 10, 2007 6:12 am |
|
|
Ah, I'd never seen one, I'm not really familiar with the field. But the thing did win a bunch of prizes at conferences, it must have some innovation to it.
EDIT: I'm looking into other popular sound design packages, but I'm still really impressed with Chuck. Other packages gain their power by expanding out into a complicated GUI, and any feature which is not explicitly provided isn't present; Chuck just unified everything into a dead simple text-based syntax and vast power and programmability emerge naturally from that. It's the difference between Visual Basic and Lisp.
Not to say that I think Chuck is "the best" and will take over (has Lisp taken over?), but it certainly appeals greatly to my sensibilities. I'm the sort who likes to do my word processing in Latex and my rendering in Pov-Ray, so... |
|
| Unfilter / Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
