| (long post!)
I am happy to get away from polemics, and look at some useful questions!
Nicola Bernardini wrote:
> 1) is there any particular problem in being or not being a C (C++,perl,lisp
whatever) programmer?
No, but perhaps in the present context we could add Csound to the list?
>
> 2) the csound-unix-dev list receives all the (boring) messages concerning
> CVS check-ins and updates, so that all the people on that list knows
> exactely when that happens. Would you like me to re-direct that bull
> over to this list?
>
Not particularly - that sounds somewhat unix/Linux- specific. I would
expect to subscribe to that list for those things. The dialogs between
John Fitch and the Mills tream don't go though this list, either, as far
as I can tell.
> 3) the csound-unix-dev list discusses very *very* specific csound-to-linux
> problems; anything that is less than very *very* specific gets re-directed
> to this list too; do you think it would be right to actually add these
> messages to this (csound) list? We can arrange that if that is the problem
That's an interesting one - I can certainly imagine being interested in
Linux audio driver issues, given current obsessions. Other Linux users
on this list will have more salient things to say, I imagine. How does
the redirection work? perhaps a digest verison could be available
somewhere?
> 4) one of the problems I (we) intended to solve was the utter unreadability
> of the sources because of ifdefs by writing linux-specific code
> in other files which get included during the configuration process;
> just as it is already being done for the graphics part of csound -
Ah! Now I sympathize with this! I too hate convoluted nested ifdefs.
Some of them got muddled between platform-specifics and
compiler-specifics. This is an issue relevant to all Csound
C-programmers, and I think absolutely should be discussed on this list.
When I do my alternative Windows WAVE driver code, the bulk of that will
be in a new file, with a new header. Then it will be easy to add to the
main sources, at the appropriate time, and, just as important, easy to
remove again if necessary. However, I think some discretion is sensible
too - we don't need to have multiple files where just a few lines have
changed - that could clearly cause far more problems than it solves.
Such a task is also something that requires complete co-ordination
across all custodial and platform-specific teams, if it is to work at
all, and I can be expected to take time.
> 5) *NO OPCODE* that was'nt existing before, nor any general purpose code,
> has been added to the unofficial linux distribution - and if/when someone
> of us will have some new code, *this* is the list where it will be
> submitted
'Submitted' is perhaps not the appropriate term, but of course we would
all like to know about them here, as we would about any opcode developed
by anyone (e.g Hans Mikelson's nested-allpass opcodes when he's finished
them!).
> 6) It's already the third or fourth message in which I ask: what else is
> wanted? that we put our distribution on the bath server so there's
> no 'hassle, hassle, hassle'? (I thought the internet was a solution but
> I now see that it is a problem for some of us);
Until very recently, when these issues arose, I must confess I did not
even know the csound-unix-dev group existed! It doesn't say much for me,
but if either that source distribution was on the Bath server which I
and perhaps many people assume now is the central repository for ~all~
csound distributions, ~pace~ MIT itself), or there was a web link, no
doubt it would be convenient for a lot of people. I can download things
very quickly from there, and time is literally money on my internet
connection!
>
> The times of the good old Atari are over,
well, not quite - the Falcon is still very strong in Germany, where
various fast enhanced models and clones have been produced, and it still
has an edge over most other machines in its price range in that it has
at least 8-channel zero-latency output available from the DSP port; but
I have no idea mow many, if any, people use the Bath Atari version of
Csound. I would be very interested to know! There are still quite a few
people using the CDP system very actively on the Atari (our port of
Csound goes back to ca 1983!).
This is lot of ascii, but I think this is just the sort of debate that
should take place in this list!
Richard Dobson
--
Test your DAW with my Soundcard Attrition Page!
http://wkweb5.cableinet.co.uk/rwd |