[Gridflow-dev] ping (fwd)

[Mathieu Bouchard]

On Sun, 12 Sep 2004, Tom Schouten wrote:

> > 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.
> do you read Dennett?

No, who is he?

The above paragraph is just my personal observation, maybe tinted/tainted
slightly by little crumbs of Critical Theory.

> > 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.
> sounds interesting, but it seems like introducing a lot of complexity..

It doesn't matter how much complexity you introduce as long as it solves a
problem for which there is no better solution.

How do _you_ solve the problem of parametrizing object classes using
objects instead of atoms? AFAIK, you don't.




Here are a few examples of usage of #remap_image.


moving ( 40px up, 30 px left ):

 |           /\ /\
[#remap_image] X [# - ( 40 30 )]
 |           \/ \/

rotating (60 degrees):

 |           /\ /\
[#remap_image] X [#rotate 6000]
 |           \/ \/

zooming (by 280/256):

 |           /\ /\
[#remap_image] X [# *>>8 280]
 |           \/ \/

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