On Sun March 12 2006 03:01, Jean-Baptiste Mestelan wrote: > On 3/11/06, Rob <lau@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I might use code-based compositional tools (well, the ones > > that can be programmed without using Lisp-like languages, > > which are evil and must be destroyed) > Would you please elaborate a bit ? just curious :-) > I recently have been feeling an itch to learn Nyquist (a Lisp > dialect, or Lisp-like language : not sure yet) which Audacity > is based upon. It's purely a personal thing, like my distaste for COBOL and Fortran and other people's distaste for Perl or PHP or BASIC. I think Lisp is one of the most annoying languages I've ever worked with, and I've managed to reduce my contact with it in the last 10 years to the point where I had to actually look up how to turn off auto-fill-mode in my .emacs file last week. I probably would have taken to algorithmic composition long ago if most of the major audio languages had been Algol-derived rather than LISP-based. The obvious exception is Csound, but that seems much more oriented towards synthesis whereas all I want to do is play my PAT files through Timidity and maybe use Bristol or Zyn for some fake analog color and Hydrogen for percussion, and haven't seen any examples of Csound being used for that type of thing. Rob
