taube at uiuc.edu
Fri, 8 Feb 2008 09:48:49 -0600
hmm i hadnt thought about the output instance, good point. but i bet
clm could also return output values as a string, with the null string
the default void case for instrument calls. then your lisp code could
simply call (read ...) on the string returned to get actual lisp
values if the value wasnt the null strings.
if instruments accepted strings in and out you could run clm
insruments over the net with a socket connection :)
On Feb 8, 2008, at 4:52 AM, Bret Battey wrote:
> I can't pretend to understand the details of the idea, though at first
> glance it seems to suggest some nice flexibility and elegance. I'm
> if it would still support the passing of data back OUT of the
> into the LISP (or whatever) calling environment -- i.e. the run*
> loop --
> since this is crucial to my coding work over the last few years.
> (Alas I
> still haven't had time to test whether run* works in SBCL Mac,
> since it
> certainly no longer does in OpenMCL.)
> I also wouldn't want a situation that would limit the length of
> passed to instruments, since I am current passing humongous xy
> (which would, for example, vastly exceed what a Csound ftable is
> to be able hold).