[dorkbotpdx-blabber] REMINDER: Pd workshop this Sunday AND YOU MISSED IT IF YOU WERENT THERE.

[Donald Delmar Davis]

OK somebody changed the subject of this thread a couple of days ago  
and I was hoping that the group would catch on so that the rest of the  
channel actually pays attention when there are new threads and topics.


feurig... happily singing here comes the grump.


On May 19, 2009, at 12:48 PM, Fred Smith wrote:

> This conversation seems to cover a wide scope of issues. It seems like
> Hans is asking for an extreme use of visual programming - visually
> representing each assembly instruction, which is very different than
> what I'm used to in visual programming tools.  I certainly have never
> tried it, but it would seem to me that the compact nature of text
> source code might win over graphical representation in that case.
>
> I think that code visualization is most powerful when used along with
> aggressive abstraction - hide the details. So, in Mykle's question of
> how you would visualize an internal variable shared between 3
> functions - my response would be that you don't visualize such things
> unless the user explicitly asks to. Like he said - get down to the big
> picture.
>
> I have to say, dropping a tool like Omondo or Together to generate UML
> based off of an existing code base of a million lines of code can be a
> really exciting process - and extremely informative.  But, it's all
> just a description of relationships, exchanges and interfaces - not a
> lot of bit level details, for sure.
>
> One of my issues with PD is it's weakness (as a relatively
> inexperienced user) in interface description. It's best suited for
> very simple interfaces and data types, but I think it would be
> interesting to provide expanded graphical representation of interface
> details, or maybe real-time type checking as connections between
> objects are made. Having said that, the help system provides a unique
> capability of showing an object in action right within the help patch
> itself - very cool.
>
> -fred
>
>
> On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 12:29 PM, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky
> <zznmeb at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 12:01 PM, Mykle Hansen <mykle at mykle.com>  
>> wrote:
>>> having said that, i 'd like some kind of code-visualizer that can  
>>> take
>>> existing
>>> code and help show its structure, allowing me to add or remove  
>>> pieces
>>> from the picture as I feel I need to observe them more or less.   
>>> that sort
>>> of thing could maybe help Ward with his optimization analysis.   i  
>>> think
>>> a holistic view of the system is hard to get in text-land, and is  
>>> what
>>> visualization is good for.
>>
>> There are Graphviz-based tools that will ingest huge chunks of C/C++
>> code and generate call graphs. I've forgotten the names, but a Google
>> search for "call graph visualization" should turn them up.
>> --
>> M. Edward (Ed) Borasky
>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/edborasky
>>
>> I've never met a happy clam. In fact, most of them were pretty  
>> steamed.
>> _______________________________________________
>> dorkbotpdx-blabber mailing list
>> dorkbotpdx-blabber at dorkbot.org
>> http://music.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/dorkbotpdx-blabber
>>
> _______________________________________________
> dorkbotpdx-blabber mailing list
> dorkbotpdx-blabber at dorkbot.org
> http://music.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/dorkbotpdx-blabber

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://music.columbia.edu/pipermail/dorkbotpdx-blabber/attachments/20090519/a1abd4f3/attachment.html