Re: [sc-dev] Towards SC 4

[Josh Parmenter <josh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Yes, I believe we really need to keep the idea of SC as a language intact (though possibly the role of the lang changes, as mentioned earlier). HOWEVER, if we keep a lang / synth divide, developing a clear API that other languages can tap into is certainly a possible goal.
As far as licensing, with SC 4, this would be a fresh project in my mind. Fresh code start (which is part of the point). If things like AU / VST are wanted, we should consider whether or not licensing differences are warranted as well. This may mean not reusing ANY code from SC 3 at all, but I think that should be part of the discussion. (iPhone store as well).
Josh

******************************************
/* Joshua D. Parmenter
http://www.realizedsound.net/josh/

“Every composer – at all times and in all cases – gives his own interpretation of how modern society is structured: whether actively or passively, consciously or unconsciously, he makes choices in this regard. He may be conservative or he may subject himself to continual renewal; or he may strive for a revolutionary, historical or social palingenesis." - Luigi Nono
*/


_______________________________________________
sc-dev mailing list

info (subscription, etc.): http://www.beast.bham.ac.uk/research/sc_mailing_lists.shtml
archive: https://listarc.bham.ac.uk/marchives/sc-dev/
search: https://listarc.bham.ac.uk/lists/sc-dev/search/