[Gridflow-dev] ping (fwd)

[Mathieu Bouchard]

On Thu, 9 Sep 2004, Tom Schouten wrote:

> > Ok, I didn't know Forth supported coroutines. 
> depends wether you implement it, actually.
> because of the direct access to the return stack, you can create
> all kinds of control structures, including coroutines/tasks/generators,
> all flavours and variants.

Ok, how do *you* implement coroutines, and why?

> yes. it can get quite confusing. though i see coroutines in forth as
> a good alternative to objects. i think this is the concept behind languages
> like simula.

can't confirm, haven't learned the one real Simula, only understood it as
that Simula was "Algol++" and existed a few years before C was even
designed.

> > It's not an explanation, it's just praise. An explanation actually
> > explains something.
> you like terminoligy wars, don't you? :)

Terminology wars is about ownership in "word territory"; the goal is to
make other people believe one's own definition of a word is more right
than the others, even than the official/default ones. Then you can use the
resulting confusion to cause existing written texts to mean something else
than what they were intended to mean, because the reference has shifted to
different referents. It is about using a word as a leverage for power.

So no, I don't like terminology wars, I just want to clarify a few things,
like, if something is a feeling, then don't call it a
reasoning/explanation.

> this is how we use it in dutch,

ok, no chance i'll learn dutch in the few next years though. You see,
still can't convince myself to learn German, and we're 2 weeks away from
PdConvention04 ! :-}

> > > > The best example of it in GridFlow is [#remap_image].
> > > it seems to me you're describing systolic arrays.
> yes, array can be anything that the topoly allows. usually only
> linear and planar though, but systolic arrays are really used a lot in 
> specialized hardware:

Well, I don't know that one object is supposed to count as a "systolic
array". Reading the article I get the impression that you have to connect
a bunch of them together, e.g. each left-outlet connected to the
left-inlet of the object below, and each right-outlet connected to the
right-inlet of the object to the left. Different topologies have different
patterns of connection for sure, but here i say it's not the same, maybe
i'd call it a "knot" in the flow, whereby one object is involved twice
during _one_ chain of processings, distinguishing between the two by using
two different inlets, and the second involvement completes the task begun
in the first. Just a way of "passing objects as arguments to other
objects" in Pd. I haven't seen anyone else use such a pattern in Pd
though.

> this does somehow comfort me knowing that pd uses tcl. not that it
> matters, but..

For Pd it doesn't matter much because almost no time is spent in Tcl
itself and almost all in Tk. Well, it depends on which version of Tk and
what you're doing, but I'm pretty sure it's like that. I haven't profiled
it though.

________________________________________________________________
Mathieu Bouchard                       http://artengine.ca/matju