--- On Sat, 2/19/11, Hans-Christoph Steiner <h...@at.or.at> wrote:
> From: Hans-Christoph Steiner <h...@at.or.at> > Subject: Re: [PD] FLOSS book Lists chapter > To: "Jonathan Wilkes" <jancs...@yahoo.com> > Cc: "Mathieu Bouchard" <ma...@artengine.ca>, "Andy Farnell" > <padawa...@obiwannabe.co.uk>, pd-list@iem.at > Date: Saturday, February 19, 2011, 12:53 AM > > On Feb 16, 2011, at 8:27 PM, Jonathan Wilkes wrote: > > > > > > > --- On Thu, 2/17/11, Andy Farnell <padawa...@obiwannabe.co.uk> > wrote: > > > >> From: Andy Farnell <padawa...@obiwannabe.co.uk> > >> Subject: Re: [PD] FLOSS book Lists chapter > >> To: "Mathieu Bouchard" <ma...@artengine.ca> > >> Cc: pd-list@iem.at > >> Date: Thursday, February 17, 2011, 1:24 AM > >> > >> On Wed, 16 Feb 2011 16:55:24 -0500 (EST) > >> Mathieu Bouchard <ma...@artengine.ca> > >> wrote: > >> > >> > >>> I don't see how the sentence « those diagrams > are > >> source code » doesn't > >>> say that there's (almost) a one-to-one > >> correspondence. > >> > >> Yikes, I tried running that through De Morgans > >> What is it you _do_ see there? Or does the law of > the > >> excluded > >> middle prevent us from straying there? :) > >> > >> > >>> But the one-to-one correspondence isn't exact. > I could > >> make a list of ways > >>> in which it isn't. > >> > >> Please, a list I'd like to see out of curiosity > when you > >> have a mo. > >> I thought about that long and hard, mainly it was > things > >> like > >> ambiguous connections where filaments cross over > another > >> object inlet, or horror of horrors, identical > objects > >> copied > >> on top of each other and wired in place...I've > been caught > >> out > >> that way before. > >> > >>> Nevertheless, with a little care, a screenshot > can be > >> > >>> made in a way that can be read by someone that > can > >> repatch it if the .pd > >>> file itself has not been published. > >> > >> I'll be honest it took a _lot_ of care. Out of > well over > >> 1000 diagrams > >> one or two ambiguities have raised peoples > annoyance enough > >> to email > >> me a "complaint". That's quite a good record I > think, but I > >> spent > >> many hours re-arranging objects and coords to get > clear and > >> unambiguous > >> patches. What some recognise as my style now was > heavily > >> influenced by > >> the writing and the need to have patches > unambiguously read > >> by eyes other > >> than my own. > > > > 1 Don't have wires overlapping object boxes, object > xlets, or object > > text* > > 2 Avoid horizontal wires > > > > What else is there? > > > > -Jonathan > > > - good layout to represent the flow of the data > - encapsulation into rational chunks > - and more... That's all true. I guess I'm limiting it to unwanted ambiguities that _cannot_ be resolved by looking at the patch. So things like fanouts and [r] creation order wouldn't count as long as having a different connection/creation order doesn't upset the function of the patch. > > .hc > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > "[T]he greatest purveyor of violence in the world today > [is] my own > government." - Martin Luther King, Jr. > > > > _______________________________________________ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list