Score Alignment Utility

[Victor Lazzarini]

But is it not the case that if you are using say, numpy, scipy
and wants to use python 2.2, you would not be able to use
the latest version of those modules? I can't see why Csound
is different in that respect.

Victor
----- Original Message -----
From: "DavidW" <vip@...>
To: <csound@...>
Sent: Sunday, June 28, 2009 5:14 AM
Subject: [Csnd] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Score Alignment Utility

> On 28/06/2009, at 9:23 AM, victor wrote:
>
>> What do you mean? Should we move to Python 2.6?
>
>
> Sorry if I wasn't clear. I'm not saying anything different to what I  was
> saying on the dev-list for a couple of years. Maybe the issue is  still
> discussed there; I don't know, I stopped reading it some time ago.
>
> Python APIs are useful for different reasons, including compositional/
> sonification/exhibtion etc etc (*), and in such application, csound is
> just another API whose explicit purpose is the synthesis/processing of
> sound. Other extensions include interfaces to 3 or 4 different  database
> types, fast multidimensional array processing, graphical  output, GUI,
> network applications, etc etc for all of which developers  maintain
> versions that use eggs or at least easy_install that compile/ install
> dependent on the _users_ version of python (within some
> backwards-compatibility window).
>
> Csound python API is a library _extension_ of python so in the general-
> to-specific usage model outlined above, it makes sense to ensure it
> independent of (or as easily compilable for) any particular version of
> python.  At the moment the interaction between csound and SCons seems  to
> require some 'hand nursing' to produce an API for particular  version of
> python and so if you want to integrate csound into your  work you're
> restricted to the use of versions of python for which that  nursing has
> been effected. Or if you're using an older version of  python, you don't
> have access to the latest csound additions.
>
> IMO, that limitation is a debilitating one and limits the potential  user
> base of csound;  most (serious) python users (a considerably  larger user
> base than that of csound) simply will not entertain using  csound while
> that limitation applied. Thankfully there are other  alternatives, which,
> while they may not be as comprehensive as csound,  are not dependent in
> the manner described.
>
> So, in short my answer to
>
>>  Should we move to Python 2.6?
>
>
> is that it doesn't matter. Most python users who maintain a body of  code
> are probably already testing against v3.
> The solution must lie in the domain of generalising the build process.
>
> D.
>
> (*) Limiting music with computers to _sound_, will ensure it continues  to
> suffer from the same problems that all Cartesian models do.
>
>
> ________________________________________________
> David Worrall.
> - Experimental Polymedia: worrall.avatar.com.au
> - Sonification: www.sonifiction.com.au
> - Education for Financial Independence: www.mindthemarkets.com.au
>
>
>
> Send bugs reports to this list.
> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body "unsubscribe
> csound"

Send bugs reports to this list.
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body "unsubscribe csound"

[Michael Gogins-2]

All Python extensions made using SWIG must be used with specific
versions of Python. Since most Python extensions are in fact made
using SWIG, this is hardly uncommon. You can verify it by going to the
Python home page and looking through the catalog of extensions.

Where Csound differs from other SWIG-based extensions, perhaps, is
that we do not currently produce multiple versions of the extension
modules targetted to different versions of Python. Feel free to
contribute this to Csound, if you think it important enough.

The SWIG approach has worked extremely well for us to date. It would
be possible to move to boost::python or to ctypes, but both would
involve considerably more work. I suspect the boost::python approach
also would be harder to build and maintain.

I have Csound working with Python 2.6 on Windows, and the next Windows
release will be targetted for Python 2.6.

Regards,
Mike

On 6/28/09, DavidW <vip@...> wrote:

> On 28/06/2009, at 9:23 AM, victor wrote:
>
>> What do you mean? Should we move to Python 2.6?
>
>
> Sorry if I wasn't clear. I'm not saying anything different to what I
> was saying on the dev-list for a couple of years. Maybe the issue is
> still discussed there; I don't know, I stopped reading it some time ago.
>
> Python APIs are useful for different reasons, including compositional/
> sonification/exhibtion etc etc (*), and in such application, csound is
> just another API whose explicit purpose is the synthesis/processing of
> sound. Other extensions include interfaces to 3 or 4 different
> database types, fast multidimensional array processing, graphical
> output, GUI, network applications, etc etc for all of which developers
> maintain versions that use eggs or at least easy_install that compile/
> install dependent on the _users_ version of python (within some
> backwards-compatibility window).
>
> Csound python API is a library _extension_ of python so in the general-
> to-specific usage model outlined above, it makes sense to ensure it
> independent of (or as easily compilable for) any particular version of
> python.  At the moment the interaction between csound and SCons seems
> to require some 'hand nursing' to produce an API for particular
> version of python and so if you want to integrate csound into your
> work you're restricted to the use of versions of python for which that
> nursing has been effected. Or if you're using an older version of
> python, you don't have access to the latest csound additions.
>
> IMO, that limitation is a debilitating one and limits the potential
> user base of csound;  most (serious) python users (a considerably
> larger user base than that of csound) simply will not entertain using
> csound while that limitation applied. Thankfully there are other
> alternatives, which, while they may not be as comprehensive as csound,
> are not dependent in the manner described.
>
> So, in short my answer to
>
>>  Should we move to Python 2.6?
>
>
> is that it doesn't matter. Most python users who maintain a body of
> code are probably already testing against v3.
> The solution must lie in the domain of generalising the build process.
>
> D.
>
> (*) Limiting music with computers to _sound_, will ensure it continues
> to suffer from the same problems that all Cartesian models do.
>
>
> ________________________________________________
> David Worrall.
> - Experimental Polymedia: worrall.avatar.com.au
> - Sonification: www.sonifiction.com.au
> - Education for Financial Independence: www.mindthemarkets.com.au
>
>
>
> Send bugs reports to this list.
> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body "unsubscribe
> csound"
>

--
Michael Gogins
Irreducible Productions
http://www.michael-gogins.com
Michael dot Gogins at gmail dot com


Send bugs reports to this list.
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body "unsubscribe csound"

[Brian Wong-2]

Some parts of this message have been removed. Learn more about Nabble's security policy.

Posted a "new" song called RappersRequiem at http://www.mediafire.com/brianwong - a microtonal piece done completely in Csound/blue.
 
There is a story behind the title of the song. A couple years ago I gave a copy of the piece to a friend who owns a recording studio. At the time he was running a charity program for troubled youth, and he liked the piece and played it for a young rapper kid. The kid wanted to record a rap over it, so my friend stuck some godawful 12TET piano tinkling over it and the kid did a rap to it. Anyhow, a few weeks later the boy was found dead after falling from the top of his apartment building. It was deemed a suicide by the police, but his family think he was pushed. I can't remember his name and have no idea what title he gave the song, but it probably exists out there on the web somewhere.

---

Create a cool, new character for your Windows Live™ Messenger. Check it out

[David Worrall]

I might be horribly out of date because I stopped struggling with the  
API a while ago. Anyway, as I see it, there are two main tasks and a  
development process issue. I think it is unnecessarily difficult, and  
not very efficient, for one person to try to solve these build and  
distribute issues for versions, all platforms.

1. Begin with the latest versions of SCons and python. Solve the SCons  
build problems - probably on a platform by platform basis.  It's a  
while since I played with the SCons build so I can't remember the  
specifics. Anyway, you're the most experienced at the build, so I  
don't know I can add anything to what you already know.

2. Develop user downloadable "easy_install" install.py file(s) (or  
better still python eggs which pulls all the necessary stuff from the  
repository,+ the right version of numpy if the API is now dependent on  
it etc).  The user, irrespective of the version of python they have  
installed,  just types "python install.py".

3.  There needs to be a willingness to make the build process  
inclusive of more users. That is a development 'policy' issue. I've  
been there before so I won't bang on. I'd start by cleaning up what's  
downloaded. Last time I looked the csound root directory was a dog's  
breakfast to any but the most frequent visitors.  Csound already has a  
steep learning curve, so there's no reasonable reason why it should be  
made steeper by having to avoid other people's litter.  If you want  
people to share a workshop then workshop tidiness is essential.  I'd  
start by tossing out everything that is not API related and make sure  
file names reflect their functions  and platform restrictions. Boring  
stuff, I know.

D.


  On 28/06/2009, at 9:15 PM, victor wrote:

> And your suggestion to bring Csound in line to what you
> think should be is? You need to educate us here.
>
> Victor
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "DavidW" <vip@...>
> To: <csound@...>
> Sent: Sunday, June 28, 2009 5:14 AM
> Subject: [Csnd] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Score Alignment Utility
>
>
>> On 28/06/2009, at 9:23 AM, victor wrote:
>>
>>> What do you mean? Should we move to Python 2.6?
>>
>>
>> Sorry if I wasn't clear. I'm not saying anything different to what  
>> I  was saying on the dev-list for a couple of years. Maybe the  
>> issue is  still discussed there; I don't know, I stopped reading it  
>> some time ago.
>>
>> Python APIs are useful for different reasons, including  
>> compositional/ sonification/exhibtion etc etc (*), and in such  
>> application, csound is just another API whose explicit purpose is  
>> the synthesis/processing of sound. Other extensions include  
>> interfaces to 3 or 4 different  database types, fast  
>> multidimensional array processing, graphical  output, GUI, network  
>> applications, etc etc for all of which developers  maintain  
>> versions that use eggs or at least easy_install that compile/  
>> install dependent on the _users_ version of python (within some  
>> backwards-compatibility window).
>>
>> Csound python API is a library _extension_ of python so in the  
>> general- to-specific usage model outlined above, it makes sense to  
>> ensure it independent of (or as easily compilable for) any  
>> particular version of python.  At the moment the interaction  
>> between csound and SCons seems  to require some 'hand nursing' to  
>> produce an API for particular  version of python and so if you want  
>> to integrate csound into your  work you're restricted to the use of  
>> versions of python for which that  nursing has been effected. Or if  
>> you're using an older version of  python, you don't have access to  
>> the latest csound additions.
>>
>> IMO, that limitation is a debilitating one and limits the  
>> potential  user base of csound;  most (serious) python users (a  
>> considerably  larger user base than that of csound) simply will not  
>> entertain using  csound while that limitation applied. Thankfully  
>> there are other  alternatives, which, while they may not be as  
>> comprehensive as csound,  are not dependent in the manner described.
>>
>> So, in short my answer to
>>
>>> Should we move to Python 2.6?
>>
>>
>> is that it doesn't matter. Most python users who maintain a body  
>> of  code are probably already testing against v3.
>> The solution must lie in the domain of generalising the build  
>> process.
>>
>> D.
>>
>> (*) Limiting music with computers to _sound_, will ensure it  
>> continues  to suffer from the same problems that all Cartesian  
>> models do.
>>
>>
>> ________________________________________________
>> David Worrall.
>> - Experimental Polymedia: worrall.avatar.com.au
>> - Sonification: www.sonifiction.com.au
>> - Education for Financial Independence: www.mindthemarkets.com.au
>>
>>
>>
>> Send bugs reports to this list.
>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body  
>> "unsubscribe csound"
>
>
>
> Send bugs reports to this list.
> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body  
> "unsubscribe csound"

________________________________________________
David Worrall.
- Experimental Polymedia: www.avatar.com.au
- Education for Financial Independence: www.mindthemarkets.com.au
Australian research affiliations:
- Capital Markets Cooperative Research Centre: www.cmcrc.com
- Sonic Communications Research Group: creative.canberra.edu.au/scrg
- MARCS Auditory Laboratories: marcs.uws.edu.au





Send bugs reports to this list.
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body "unsubscribe csound"

[David Worrall]

On 28/06/2009, at 9:18 PM, victor wrote:

> But is it not the case that if you are using say, numpy, scipy
> and wants to use python 2.2, you would not be able to use
> the latest version of those modules? I can't see why Csound
> is different in that respect.
>
> Victor

It's probably not. You might run into problems, if you try to do that.  
I was getting carried away :-)
So if you want to use later features of, say Numpy that are python  
version dependent, you'd probably just upgrade your version of python.  
The only reason not to, would probably be because you're trying to use  
a third-party module that won't load into a later python for some  
weird reason. Which is where the regress kicks in. But in my  
experience this is quite rare. Python is quite backwards compatible  
and deprecation is usually overt, so updating your own code it is  
usually not such a big problem. There was a time, for eg, when numpy  
was called numeric and you'll find python code put there which won't  
run in the later pythons because numeric is no longer supported as a  
separate module.

D.

> ----- Original Message ----- From: "DavidW" <vip@...>
> To: <csound@...>
> Sent: Sunday, June 28, 2009 5:14 AM
> Subject: [Csnd] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Score Alignment Utility
>
>
>> On 28/06/2009, at 9:23 AM, victor wrote:
>>
>>> What do you mean? Should we move to Python 2.6?
>>
>>
>> Sorry if I wasn't clear. I'm not saying anything different to what  
>> I  was saying on the dev-list for a couple of years. Maybe the  
>> issue is  still discussed there; I don't know, I stopped reading it  
>> some time ago.
>>
>> Python APIs are useful for different reasons, including  
>> compositional/ sonification/exhibtion etc etc (*), and in such  
>> application, csound is just another API whose explicit purpose is  
>> the synthesis/processing of sound. Other extensions include  
>> interfaces to 3 or 4 different  database types, fast  
>> multidimensional array processing, graphical  output, GUI, network  
>> applications, etc etc for all of which developers  maintain  
>> versions that use eggs or at least easy_install that compile/  
>> install dependent on the _users_ version of python (within some  
>> backwards-compatibility window).
>>
>> Csound python API is a library _extension_ of python so in the  
>> general- to-specific usage model outlined above, it makes sense to  
>> ensure it independent of (or as easily compilable for) any  
>> particular version of python.  At the moment the interaction  
>> between csound and SCons seems  to require some 'hand nursing' to  
>> produce an API for particular  version of python and so if you want  
>> to integrate csound into your  work you're restricted to the use of  
>> versions of python for which that  nursing has been effected. Or if  
>> you're using an older version of  python, you don't have access to  
>> the latest csound additions.
>>
>> IMO, that limitation is a debilitating one and limits the  
>> potential  user base of csound;  most (serious) python users (a  
>> considerably  larger user base than that of csound) simply will not  
>> entertain using  csound while that limitation applied. Thankfully  
>> there are other  alternatives, which, while they may not be as  
>> comprehensive as csound,  are not dependent in the manner described.
>>
>> So, in short my answer to
>>
>>> Should we move to Python 2.6?
>>
>>
>> is that it doesn't matter. Most python users who maintain a body  
>> of  code are probably already testing against v3.
>> The solution must lie in the domain of generalising the build  
>> process.
>>
>> D.
>>
>> (*) Limiting music with computers to _sound_, will ensure it  
>> continues  to suffer from the same problems that all Cartesian  
>> models do.
>>
>>
>> ________________________________________________
>> David Worrall.
>> - Experimental Polymedia: worrall.avatar.com.au
>> - Sonification: www.sonifiction.com.au
>> - Education for Financial Independence: www.mindthemarkets.com.au
>>
>>
>>
>> Send bugs reports to this list.
>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body  
>> "unsubscribe csound"
>
>
>
> Send bugs reports to this list.
> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body  
> "unsubscribe csound"

________________________________________________
David Worrall.
- Experimental Polymedia: www.avatar.com.au
- Education for Financial Independence: www.mindthemarkets.com.au
Australian research affiliations:
- Capital Markets Cooperative Research Centre: www.cmcrc.com
- Sonic Communications Research Group: creative.canberra.edu.au/scrg
- MARCS Auditory Laboratories: marcs.uws.edu.au





Send bugs reports to this list.
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body "unsubscribe csound"

[David Worrall]

On 29/06/2009, at 1:47 AM, Michael Gogins wrote:
..
> Where Csound differs from other SWIG-based extensions, perhaps, is
> that we do not currently produce multiple versions of the extension
> modules targetted to different versions of Python. Feel free to
> contribute this to Csound, if you think it important enough.
>
Its not just a matter of importance.
I won't be contributing code to csound until the development process  
is made more inclusive.

> The SWIG approach has worked extremely well for us to date.

Maybe. Depends how you define "us". My last experience was is that it  
was mysteriously buggy under OSX.
> It would
> be possible to move to boost::python or to ctypes, but both would
> involve considerably more work. I suspect the boost::python approach
> also would be harder to build and maintain.
>
I was not recommending that. I was simply asking if anyone had  
developed an alternative to the problems exhibited by the SWIG/SCons  
process on OSX.

> I have Csound working with Python 2.6 on Windows, and the next Windows
> release will be targetted for Python 2.6.
>
lucky for 'doze users!

D.

> Regards,
> Mike
>
> On 6/28/09, DavidW <vip@...> wrote:
>> On 28/06/2009, at 9:23 AM, victor wrote:
>>
>>> What do you mean? Should we move to Python 2.6?
>>
>>
>> Sorry if I wasn't clear. I'm not saying anything different to what I
>> was saying on the dev-list for a couple of years. Maybe the issue is
>> still discussed there; I don't know, I stopped reading it some time  
>> ago.
>>
>> Python APIs are useful for different reasons, including  
>> compositional/
>> sonification/exhibtion etc etc (*), and in such application, csound  
>> is
>> just another API whose explicit purpose is the synthesis/processing  
>> of
>> sound. Other extensions include interfaces to 3 or 4 different
>> database types, fast multidimensional array processing, graphical
>> output, GUI, network applications, etc etc for all of which  
>> developers
>> maintain versions that use eggs or at least easy_install that  
>> compile/
>> install dependent on the _users_ version of python (within some
>> backwards-compatibility window).
>>
>> Csound python API is a library _extension_ of python so in the  
>> general-
>> to-specific usage model outlined above, it makes sense to ensure it
>> independent of (or as easily compilable for) any particular version  
>> of
>> python.  At the moment the interaction between csound and SCons seems
>> to require some 'hand nursing' to produce an API for particular
>> version of python and so if you want to integrate csound into your
>> work you're restricted to the use of versions of python for which  
>> that
>> nursing has been effected. Or if you're using an older version of
>> python, you don't have access to the latest csound additions.
>>
>> IMO, that limitation is a debilitating one and limits the potential
>> user base of csound;  most (serious) python users (a considerably
>> larger user base than that of csound) simply will not entertain using
>> csound while that limitation applied. Thankfully there are other
>> alternatives, which, while they may not be as comprehensive as  
>> csound,
>> are not dependent in the manner described.
>>
>> So, in short my answer to
>>
>>> Should we move to Python 2.6?
>>
>>
>> is that it doesn't matter. Most python users who maintain a body of
>> code are probably already testing against v3.
>> The solution must lie in the domain of generalising the build  
>> process.
>>
>> D.
>>
>> (*) Limiting music with computers to _sound_, will ensure it  
>> continues
>> to suffer from the same problems that all Cartesian models do.
>>
>>
>> ________________________________________________
>> David Worrall.
>> - Experimental Polymedia: worrall.avatar.com.au
>> - Sonification: www.sonifiction.com.au
>> - Education for Financial Independence: www.mindthemarkets.com.au
>>
>>
>>
>> Send bugs reports to this list.
>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body  
>> "unsubscribe
>> csound"
>>
>
>
> --
> Michael Gogins
> Irreducible Productions
> http://www.michael-gogins.com
> Michael dot Gogins at gmail dot com
>
>
> Send bugs reports to this list.
> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body  
> "unsubscribe csound"

________________________________________________
David Worrall.
- Experimental Polymedia: www.avatar.com.au
- Education for Financial Independence: www.mindthemarkets.com.au
Australian research affiliations:
- Capital Markets Cooperative Research Centre: www.cmcrc.com
- Sonic Communications Research Group: creative.canberra.edu.au/scrg
- MARCS Auditory Laboratories: marcs.uws.edu.au





Send bugs reports to this list.
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body "unsubscribe csound"

[Victor Lazzarini]

The Python API on OSX works as elsewhere, as far as I can see.
There are no specific bugs to it, AFAIK. As far as building it,
if you have SWIG (a reasonably recent version), it will build OK,
without any issues.

The major problem I see in building Csound is that there are lots
of dependencies; that's not a problem with Csound itself being
easy or not to build, but a question of having a reasonably
complete developer's system. On Linux, this is not an issue
as systems are generally complete and packages can be easily found
for everything. On OSX and Windows, you need to have a
developer's attitude to it.

Victor

----- Original Message -----
From: DavidW <vip@...>
Date: Sunday, June 28, 2009 5:20 pm
Subject: [Csnd] Re: Building Python API (was Re: : Score Alignment Utility)
To: csound@...

>
> On 29/06/2009, at 1:47 AM, Michael Gogins wrote:
> ..
> > Where Csound differs from other SWIG-based extensions,
> perhaps, is
> > that we do not currently produce multiple versions of the extension
> > modules targetted to different versions of Python. Feel free to
> > contribute this to Csound, if you think it important enough.
> >
> Its not just a matter of importance.
> I won't be contributing code to csound until the development
> process 
> is made more inclusive.
>
> > The SWIG approach has worked extremely well for us to date.
>
> Maybe. Depends how you define "us". My last experience was is
> that it 
> was mysteriously buggy under OSX.
> > It would
> > be possible to move to boost::python or to ctypes, but both would
> > involve considerably more work. I suspect the boost::python approach
> > also would be harder to build and maintain.
> >
> I was not recommending that. I was simply asking if anyone
> had 
> developed an alternative to the problems exhibited by the
> SWIG/SCons 
> process on OSX.
>
> > I have Csound working with Python 2.6 on Windows, and the next
> Windows> release will be targetted for Python 2.6.
> >
> lucky for 'doze users!
>
> D.
>
> > Regards,
> > Mike
> >
> > On 6/28/09, DavidW <vip@...> wrote:
> >> On 28/06/2009, at 9:23 AM, victor wrote:
> >>
> >>> What do you mean? Should we move to Python 2.6?
> >>
> >>
> >> Sorry if I wasn't clear. I'm not saying anything different to
> what I
> >> was saying on the dev-list for a couple of years. Maybe the
> issue is
> >> still discussed there; I don't know, I stopped reading it
> some time 
> >> ago.
> >>
> >> Python APIs are useful for different reasons, including 
> >> compositional/
> >> sonification/exhibtion etc etc (*), and in such application,
> csound 
> >> is
> >> just another API whose explicit purpose is the
> synthesis/processing 
> >> of
> >> sound. Other extensions include interfaces to 3 or 4 different
> >> database types, fast multidimensional array processing, graphical
> >> output, GUI, network applications, etc etc for all of
> which 
> >> developers
> >> maintain versions that use eggs or at least easy_install
> that 
> >> compile/
> >> install dependent on the _users_ version of python (within some
> >> backwards-compatibility window).
> >>
> >> Csound python API is a library _extension_ of python so in
> the 
> >> general-
> >> to-specific usage model outlined above, it makes sense to
> ensure it
> >> independent of (or as easily compilable for) any particular
> version 
> >> of
> >> python.  At the moment the interaction between csound
> and SCons seems
> >> to require some 'hand nursing' to produce an API for particular
> >> version of python and so if you want to integrate csound into your
> >> work you're restricted to the use of versions of python for
> which 
> >> that
> >> nursing has been effected. Or if you're using an older
> version of
> >> python, you don't have access to the latest csound additions.
> >>
> >> IMO, that limitation is a debilitating one and limits the potential
> >> user base of csound;  most (serious) python users (a
> considerably>> larger user base than that of csound) simply will
> not entertain using
> >> csound while that limitation applied. Thankfully there are other
> >> alternatives, which, while they may not be as comprehensive
> as 
> >> csound,
> >> are not dependent in the manner described.
> >>
> >> So, in short my answer to
> >>
> >>> Should we move to Python 2.6?
> >>
> >>
> >> is that it doesn't matter. Most python users who maintain a
> body of
> >> code are probably already testing against v3.
> >> The solution must lie in the domain of generalising the
> build 
> >> process.
> >>
> >> D.
> >>
> >> (*) Limiting music with computers to _sound_, will ensure
> it 
> >> continues
> >> to suffer from the same problems that all Cartesian models do.
> >>
> >>
> >> ________________________________________________
> >> David Worrall.
> >> - Experimental Polymedia: worrall.avatar.com.au
> >> - Sonification: www.sonifiction.com.au
> >> - Education for Financial Independence: www.mindthemarkets.com.au
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Send bugs reports to this list.
> >> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with
> body 
> >> "unsubscribe
> >> csound"
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Michael Gogins
> > Irreducible Productions
> > http://www.michael-gogins.com
> > Michael dot Gogins at gmail dot com
> >
> >
> > Send bugs reports to this list.
> > To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with
> body 
> > "unsubscribe csound"
>
> ________________________________________________
> David Worrall.
> - Experimental Polymedia: www.avatar.com.au
> - Education for Financial Independence: www.mindthemarkets.com.au
> Australian research affiliations:
> - Capital Markets Cooperative Research Centre: www.cmcrc.com
> - Sonic Communications Research Group: creative.canberra.edu.au/scrg
> - MARCS Auditory Laboratories: marcs.uws.edu.au
>
>
>
>
>
> Send bugs reports to this list.
> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body
> "unsubscribe csound"

Dr Victor Lazzarini, Senior Lecturer, Dept. of Music,
National University of Ireland, Maynooth

[Jacob Joaquin]

Csound is not user-friendly.  If developers and others in the community spent a full year working towards improving the user-experience, while putting on hold everything else Csound related, this would be time well spent.  People are easily turned off the number of hoops they have to jump through - whether its issues with Python, or just rendering a file.  Csound is supposed to be an instrument of musical expression, not a technical hurdle.

In my humble opinion.  :)

David Worrall wrote:

I might be horribly out of date because I stopped struggling with the  
API a while ago. Anyway, as I see it, there are two main tasks and a  
development process issue. I think it is unnecessarily difficult, and  
not very efficient, for one person to try to solve these build and  
distribute issues for versions, all platforms.

1. Begin with the latest versions of SCons and python. Solve the SCons  
build problems - probably on a platform by platform basis.  It's a  
while since I played with the SCons build so I can't remember the  
specifics. Anyway, you're the most experienced at the build, so I  
don't know I can add anything to what you already know.

2. Develop user downloadable "easy_install" install.py file(s) (or  
better still python eggs which pulls all the necessary stuff from the  
repository,+ the right version of numpy if the API is now dependent on  
it etc).  The user, irrespective of the version of python they have  
installed,  just types "python install.py".

3.  There needs to be a willingness to make the build process  
inclusive of more users. That is a development 'policy' issue. I've  
been there before so I won't bang on. I'd start by cleaning up what's  
downloaded. Last time I looked the csound root directory was a dog's  
breakfast to any but the most frequent visitors.  Csound already has a  
steep learning curve, so there's no reasonable reason why it should be  
made steeper by having to avoid other people's litter.  If you want  
people to share a workshop then workshop tidiness is essential.  I'd  
start by tossing out everything that is not API related and make sure  
file names reflect their functions  and platform restrictions. Boring  
stuff, I know.

D.


  On 28/06/2009, at 9:15 PM, victor wrote:

> And your suggestion to bring Csound in line to what you
> think should be is? You need to educate us here.
>
> Victor
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "DavidW" <[e-mail]>
> To: <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Sunday, June 28, 2009 5:14 AM
> Subject: [Csnd] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Score Alignment Utility
>
>
>> On 28/06/2009, at 9:23 AM, victor wrote:
>>
>>> What do you mean? Should we move to Python 2.6?
>>
>>
>> Sorry if I wasn't clear. I'm not saying anything different to what  
>> I  was saying on the dev-list for a couple of years. Maybe the  
>> issue is  still discussed there; I don't know, I stopped reading it  
>> some time ago.
>>
>> Python APIs are useful for different reasons, including  
>> compositional/ sonification/exhibtion etc etc (*), and in such  
>> application, csound is just another API whose explicit purpose is  
>> the synthesis/processing of sound. Other extensions include  
>> interfaces to 3 or 4 different  database types, fast  
>> multidimensional array processing, graphical  output, GUI, network  
>> applications, etc etc for all of which developers  maintain  
>> versions that use eggs or at least easy_install that compile/  
>> install dependent on the _users_ version of python (within some  
>> backwards-compatibility window).
>>
>> Csound python API is a library _extension_ of python so in the  
>> general- to-specific usage model outlined above, it makes sense to  
>> ensure it independent of (or as easily compilable for) any  
>> particular version of python.  At the moment the interaction  
>> between csound and SCons seems  to require some 'hand nursing' to  
>> produce an API for particular  version of python and so if you want  
>> to integrate csound into your  work you're restricted to the use of  
>> versions of python for which that  nursing has been effected. Or if  
>> you're using an older version of  python, you don't have access to  
>> the latest csound additions.
>>
>> IMO, that limitation is a debilitating one and limits the  
>> potential  user base of csound;  most (serious) python users (a  
>> considerably  larger user base than that of csound) simply will not  
>> entertain using  csound while that limitation applied. Thankfully  
>> there are other  alternatives, which, while they may not be as  
>> comprehensive as csound,  are not dependent in the manner described.
>>
>> So, in short my answer to
>>
>>> Should we move to Python 2.6?
>>
>>
>> is that it doesn't matter. Most python users who maintain a body  
>> of  code are probably already testing against v3.
>> The solution must lie in the domain of generalising the build  
>> process.
>>
>> D.
>>
>> (*) Limiting music with computers to _sound_, will ensure it  
>> continues  to suffer from the same problems that all Cartesian  
>> models do.
>>
>>
>> ________________________________________________
>> David Worrall.
>> - Experimental Polymedia: worrall.avatar.com.au
>> - Sonification: www.sonifiction.com.au
>> - Education for Financial Independence: www.mindthemarkets.com.au
>>
>>
>>
>> Send bugs reports to this list.
>> To unsubscribe, send email [e-mail] with body  
>> "unsubscribe csound"
>
>
>
> Send bugs reports to this list.
> To unsubscribe, send email [e-mail] with body  
> "unsubscribe csound"

________________________________________________
David Worrall.
- Experimental Polymedia: www.avatar.com.au
- Education for Financial Independence: www.mindthemarkets.com.au
Australian research affiliations:
- Capital Markets Cooperative Research Centre: www.cmcrc.com
- Sonic Communications Research Group: creative.canberra.edu.au/scrg
- MARCS Auditory Laboratories: marcs.uws.edu.au





Send bugs reports to this list.
To unsubscribe, send email [e-mail] with body "unsubscribe csound"

[David Worrall]

I'm coming out of first gear on this... I now remember the issue that  
tripped me last time. It was the ability to choose the python  
distribution.
from http://csound.sourceforge.net/faq.html#Q3
> Which version of Python do I need to use the Python opcodes or  
> interface?
>
...

> Mac OS X: On OS X 10.3 and 10.4, Csound uses Python 2.3 by default  
> because this is what is supplied by Apple. However, from version  
> 5.07 of Csound on, the OSX-10.4 installers also supply a Python 2.4  
> and/or Python 2.5 csnd module(s). These are installed with the  
> corresponding MacPython 2.x framework and either Apple Python or  
> MacPython may be used. Python opcodes, however, are currently only  
> linked to Apple's supplied Python 2.3 framework for all 10.3 and  
> 10.4 binary installers.
>
> For the OS X 10.5-only installers , both the Python opcodes and  
> Python csnd module are linked only with the Apple-supplied Python 2.5
>

I don't know a single regular user of python on the mac who uses this  
version. And the python developers specifically recommend against it.

see http://www.python.org/download/mac/

Does a fix for this exist yet that allows the builds on OS 10.5 to /
Library/Frameworks/Python.framework/Versions/Current/bin/python ?

D.


On 29/06/2009, at 2:30 AM, Victor.Lazzarini@... wrote:

> The Python API on OSX works as elsewhere, as far as I can see.
> There are no specific bugs to it, AFAIK. As far as building it,
> if you have SWIG (a reasonably recent version), it will build OK,
> without any issues.
>
> The major problem I see in building Csound is that there are lots
> of dependencies; that's not a problem with Csound itself being
> easy or not to build, but a question of having a reasonably
> complete developer's system. On Linux, this is not an issue
> as systems are generally complete and packages can be easily found
> for everything. On OSX and Windows, you need to have a
> developer's attitude to it.
>
> Victor
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: DavidW <vip@...>
> Date: Sunday, June 28, 2009 5:20 pm
> Subject: [Csnd] Re: Building Python API (was Re: : Score Alignment  
> Utility)
> To: csound@...
>
> >
> > On 29/06/2009, at 1:47 AM, Michael Gogins wrote:
> > ..
> > > Where Csound differs from other SWIG-based extensions,
> > perhaps, is
> > > that we do not currently produce multiple versions of the  
> extension
> > > modules targetted to different versions of Python. Feel free to
> > > contribute this to Csound, if you think it important enough.
> > >
> > Its not just a matter of importance.
> > I won't be contributing code to csound until the development
> > process
> > is made more inclusive.
> >
> > > The SWIG approach has worked extremely well for us to date.
> >
> > Maybe. Depends how you define "us". My last experience was is
> > that it
> > was mysteriously buggy under OSX.
> > > It would
> > > be possible to move to boost::python or to ctypes, but both would
> > > involve considerably more work. I suspect the boost::python  
> approach
> > > also would be harder to build and maintain.
> > >
> > I was not recommending that. I was simply asking if anyone
> > had
> > developed an alternative to the problems exhibited by the
> > SWIG/SCons
> > process on OSX.
> >
> > > I have Csound working with Python 2.6 on Windows, and the next
> > Windows> release will be targetted for Python 2.6.
> > >
> > lucky for 'doze users!
> >
> > D.
> >
> > > Regards,
> > > Mike
> > >
> > > On 6/28/09, DavidW <vip@...> wrote:
> > >> On 28/06/2009, at 9:23 AM, victor wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> What do you mean? Should we move to Python 2.6?
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Sorry if I wasn't clear. I'm not saying anything different to
> > what I
> > >> was saying on the dev-list for a couple of years. Maybe the
> > issue is
> > >> still discussed there; I don't know, I stopped reading it
> > some time
> > >> ago.
> > >>
> > >> Python APIs are useful for different reasons, including
> > >> compositional/
> > >> sonification/exhibtion etc etc (*), and in such application,
> > csound
> > >> is
> > >> just another API whose explicit purpose is the
> > synthesis/processing
> > >> of
> > >> sound. Other extensions include interfaces to 3 or 4 different
> > >> database types, fast multidimensional array processing, graphical
> > >> output, GUI, network applications, etc etc for all of
> > which
> > >> developers
> > >> maintain versions that use eggs or at least easy_install
> > that
> > >> compile/
> > >> install dependent on the _users_ version of python (within some
> > >> backwards-compatibility window).
> > >>
> > >> Csound python API is a library _extension_ of python so in
> > the
> > >> general-
> > >> to-specific usage model outlined above, it makes sense to
> > ensure it
> > >> independent of (or as easily compilable for) any particular
> > version
> > >> of
> > >> python.  At the moment the interaction between csound
> > and SCons seems
> > >> to require some 'hand nursing' to produce an API for particular
> > >> version of python and so if you want to integrate csound into  
> your
> > >> work you're restricted to the use of versions of python for
> > which
> > >> that
> > >> nursing has been effected. Or if you're using an older
> > version of
> > >> python, you don't have access to the latest csound additions.
> > >>
> > >> IMO, that limitation is a debilitating one and limits the  
> potential
> > >> user base of csound;  most (serious) python users (a
> > considerably>> larger user base than that of csound) simply will
> > not entertain using
> > >> csound while that limitation applied. Thankfully there are other
> > >> alternatives, which, while they may not be as comprehensive
> > as
> > >> csound,
> > >> are not dependent in the manner described.
> > >>
> > >> So, in short my answer to
> > >>
> > >>> Should we move to Python 2.6?
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> is that it doesn't matter. Most python users who maintain a
> > body of
> > >> code are probably already testing against v3.
> > >> The solution must lie in the domain of generalising the
> > build
> > >> process.
> > >>
> > >> D.
> > >>
> > >> (*) Limiting music with computers to _sound_, will ensure
> > it
> > >> continues
> > >> to suffer from the same problems that all Cartesian models do.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> ________________________________________________
> > >> David Worrall.
> > >> - Experimental Polymedia: worrall.avatar.com.au
> > >> - Sonification: www.sonifiction.com.au
> > >> - Education for Financial Independence: www.mindthemarkets.com.au
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Send bugs reports to this list.
> > >> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with
> > body
> > >> "unsubscribe
> > >> csound"
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Michael Gogins
> > > Irreducible Productions
> > > http://www.michael-gogins.com
> > > Michael dot Gogins at gmail dot com
> > >
> > >
> > > Send bugs reports to this list.
> > > To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with
> > body
> > > "unsubscribe csound"
> >
> > ________________________________________________
> > David Worrall.
> > - Experimental Polymedia: www.avatar.com.au
> > - Education for Financial Independence: www.mindthemarkets.com.au
> > Australian research affiliations:
> > - Capital Markets Cooperative Research Centre: www.cmcrc.com
> > - Sonic Communications Research Group: creative.canberra.edu.au/scrg
> > - MARCS Auditory Laboratories: marcs.uws.edu.au
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Send bugs reports to this list.
> > To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body
> > "unsubscribe csound"
>
> Dr Victor Lazzarini, Senior Lecturer, Dept. of Music,
> National University of Ireland, Maynooth

________________________________________________
David Worrall.
- Experimental Polymedia: www.avatar.com.au
- Education for Financial Independence: www.mindthemarkets.com.au
Australian research affiliations:
- Capital Markets Cooperative Research Centre: www.cmcrc.com
- Sonic Communications Research Group: creative.canberra.edu.au/scrg
- MARCS Auditory Laboratories: marcs.uws.edu.au





Send bugs reports to this list.
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body "unsubscribe csound"

[Victor Lazzarini]

The Intel binaries I build are linked against MacPython 2.5. But it's
done in 10.4 (at the moment), so no guarantees for OSX 10.5.

----- Original Message -----
From: DavidW <vip@...>
Date: Monday, June 29, 2009 5:15 am
Subject: [Csnd] Re: Re: Re: Building Python API (was Re: : Score Alignment Utility)
To: csound@...

> I'm coming out of first gear on this... I now remember the issue
> that 
> tripped me last time. It was the ability to choose the
> python 
> distribution.
> from http://csound.sourceforge.net/faq.html#Q3
> > Which version of Python do I need to use the Python opcodes
> or 
> > interface?
> >
> ...
> > Mac OS X: On OS X 10.3 and 10.4, Csound uses Python 2.3 by
> default 
> > because this is what is supplied by Apple. However, from
> version 
> > 5.07 of Csound on, the OSX-10.4 installers also supply a
> Python 2.4 
> > and/or Python 2.5 csnd module(s). These are installed with
> the 
> > corresponding MacPython 2.x framework and either Apple Python
> or 
> > MacPython may be used. Python opcodes, however, are currently
> only 
> > linked to Apple's supplied Python 2.3 framework for all 10.3
> and 
> > 10.4 binary installers.
> >
> > For the OS X 10.5-only installers , both the Python opcodes
> and 
> > Python csnd module are linked only with the Apple-supplied
> Python 2.5
> >
> I don't know a single regular user of python on the mac who uses
> this 
> version. And the python developers specifically recommend
> against it.
>
> see http://www.python.org/download/mac/
>
> Does a fix for this exist yet that allows the builds on OS 10.5
> to /
> Library/Frameworks/Python.framework/Versions/Current/bin/python ?
>
> D.
>
>
> On 29/06/2009, at 2:30 AM, Victor.Lazzarini@... wrote:
>
> > The Python API on OSX works as elsewhere, as far as I can see.
> > There are no specific bugs to it, AFAIK. As far as building it,
> > if you have SWIG (a reasonably recent version), it will build OK,
> > without any issues.
> >
> > The major problem I see in building Csound is that there are lots
> > of dependencies; that's not a problem with Csound itself being
> > easy or not to build, but a question of having a reasonably
> > complete developer's system. On Linux, this is not an issue
> > as systems are generally complete and packages can be easily found
> > for everything. On OSX and Windows, you need to have a
> > developer's attitude to it.
> >
> > Victor
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: DavidW <vip@...>
> > Date: Sunday, June 28, 2009 5:20 pm
> > Subject: [Csnd] Re: Building Python API (was Re: : Score
> Alignment 
> > Utility)
> > To: csound@...
> >
> > >
> > > On 29/06/2009, at 1:47 AM, Michael Gogins wrote:
> > > ..
> > > > Where Csound differs from other SWIG-based extensions,
> > > perhaps, is
> > > > that we do not currently produce multiple versions of
> the 
> > extension
> > > > modules targetted to different versions of Python. Feel
> free to
> > > > contribute this to Csound, if you think it important enough.
> > > >
> > > Its not just a matter of importance.
> > > I won't be contributing code to csound until the development
> > > process
> > > is made more inclusive.
> > >
> > > > The SWIG approach has worked extremely well for us to date.
> > >
> > > Maybe. Depends how you define "us". My last experience was is
> > > that it
> > > was mysteriously buggy under OSX.
> > > > It would
> > > > be possible to move to boost::python or to ctypes, but
> both would
> > > > involve considerably more work. I suspect the
> boost::python 
> > approach
> > > > also would be harder to build and maintain.
> > > >
> > > I was not recommending that. I was simply asking if anyone
> > > had
> > > developed an alternative to the problems exhibited by the
> > > SWIG/SCons
> > > process on OSX.
> > >
> > > > I have Csound working with Python 2.6 on Windows, and the next
> > > Windows> release will be targetted for Python 2.6.
> > > >
> > > lucky for 'doze users!
> > >
> > > D.
> > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Mike
> > > >
> > > > On 6/28/09, DavidW <vip@...> wrote:
> > > >> On 28/06/2009, at 9:23 AM, victor wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> What do you mean? Should we move to Python 2.6?
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> Sorry if I wasn't clear. I'm not saying anything
> different to
> > > what I
> > > >> was saying on the dev-list for a couple of years. Maybe the
> > > issue is
> > > >> still discussed there; I don't know, I stopped reading it
> > > some time
> > > >> ago.
> > > >>
> > > >> Python APIs are useful for different reasons, including
> > > >> compositional/
> > > >> sonification/exhibtion etc etc (*), and in such application,
> > > csound
> > > >> is
> > > >> just another API whose explicit purpose is the
> > > synthesis/processing
> > > >> of
> > > >> sound. Other extensions include interfaces to 3 or 4 different
> > > >> database types, fast multidimensional array processing,
> graphical> > >> output, GUI, network applications, etc etc for
> all of
> > > which
> > > >> developers
> > > >> maintain versions that use eggs or at least easy_install
> > > that
> > > >> compile/
> > > >> install dependent on the _users_ version of python
> (within some
> > > >> backwards-compatibility window).
> > > >>
> > > >> Csound python API is a library _extension_ of python so in
> > > the
> > > >> general-
> > > >> to-specific usage model outlined above, it makes sense to
> > > ensure it
> > > >> independent of (or as easily compilable for) any particular
> > > version
> > > >> of
> > > >> python.  At the moment the interaction between csound
> > > and SCons seems
> > > >> to require some 'hand nursing' to produce an API for particular
> > > >> version of python and so if you want to integrate csound
> into 
> > your
> > > >> work you're restricted to the use of versions of python for
> > > which
> > > >> that
> > > >> nursing has been effected. Or if you're using an older
> > > version of
> > > >> python, you don't have access to the latest csound additions.
> > > >>
> > > >> IMO, that limitation is a debilitating one and limits
> the 
> > potential
> > > >> user base of csound;  most (serious) python users (a
> > > considerably>> larger user base than that of csound) simply will
> > > not entertain using
> > > >> csound while that limitation applied. Thankfully there
> are other
> > > >> alternatives, which, while they may not be as comprehensive
> > > as
> > > >> csound,
> > > >> are not dependent in the manner described.
> > > >>
> > > >> So, in short my answer to
> > > >>
> > > >>> Should we move to Python 2.6?
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> is that it doesn't matter. Most python users who maintain a
> > > body of
> > > >> code are probably already testing against v3.
> > > >> The solution must lie in the domain of generalising the
> > > build
> > > >> process.
> > > >>
> > > >> D.
> > > >>
> > > >> (*) Limiting music with computers to _sound_, will ensure
> > > it
> > > >> continues
> > > >> to suffer from the same problems that all Cartesian
> models do.
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> ________________________________________________
> > > >> David Worrall.
> > > >> - Experimental Polymedia: worrall.avatar.com.au
> > > >> - Sonification: www.sonifiction.com.au
> > > >> - Education for Financial Independence:
> www.mindthemarkets.com.au> > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> Send bugs reports to this list.
> > > >> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with
> > > body
> > > >> "unsubscribe
> > > >> csound"
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Michael Gogins
> > > > Irreducible Productions
> > > > http://www.michael-gogins.com
> > > > Michael dot Gogins at gmail dot com
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Send bugs reports to this list.
> > > > To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with
> > > body
> > > > "unsubscribe csound"
> > >
> > > ________________________________________________
> > > David Worrall.
> > > - Experimental Polymedia: www.avatar.com.au
> > > - Education for Financial Independence: www.mindthemarkets.com.au
> > > Australian research affiliations:
> > > - Capital Markets Cooperative Research Centre: www.cmcrc.com
> > > - Sonic Communications Research
> Group: creative.canberra.edu.au/scrg> > - MARCS Auditory
> Laboratories: marcs.uws.edu.au
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Send bugs reports to this list.
> > > To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body
> > > "unsubscribe csound"
> >
> > Dr Victor Lazzarini, Senior Lecturer, Dept. of Music,
> > National University of Ireland, Maynooth
>
> ________________________________________________
> David Worrall.
> - Experimental Polymedia: www.avatar.com.au
> - Education for Financial Independence: www.mindthemarkets.com.au
> Australian research affiliations:
> - Capital Markets Cooperative Research Centre: www.cmcrc.com
> - Sonic Communications Research Group: creative.canberra.edu.au/scrg
> - MARCS Auditory Laboratories: marcs.uws.edu.au
>
>
>
>
>
> Send bugs reports to this list.
> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body
> "unsubscribe csound"

Dr Victor Lazzarini, Senior Lecturer, Dept. of Music,
National University of Ireland, Maynooth

[Victor Lazzarini]

By the way, I am quite positive that if you have MacPython 2.5, Csound
will find it before the Apple version and link to it (at least it works like that
in my system).

Victor

----- Original Message -----
From: DavidW <vip@...>
Date: Monday, June 29, 2009 5:15 am
Subject: [Csnd] Re: Re: Re: Building Python API (was Re: : Score Alignment Utility)
To: csound@...

> I'm coming out of first gear on this... I now remember the issue
> that 
> tripped me last time. It was the ability to choose the
> python 
> distribution.
> from http://csound.sourceforge.net/faq.html#Q3
> > Which version of Python do I need to use the Python opcodes
> or 
> > interface?
> >
> ...
> > Mac OS X: On OS X 10.3 and 10.4, Csound uses Python 2.3 by
> default 
> > because this is what is supplied by Apple. However, from
> version 
> > 5.07 of Csound on, the OSX-10.4 installers also supply a
> Python 2.4 
> > and/or Python 2.5 csnd module(s). These are installed with
> the 
> > corresponding MacPython 2.x framework and either Apple Python
> or 
> > MacPython may be used. Python opcodes, however, are currently
> only 
> > linked to Apple's supplied Python 2.3 framework for all 10.3
> and 
> > 10.4 binary installers.
> >
> > For the OS X 10.5-only installers , both the Python opcodes
> and 
> > Python csnd module are linked only with the Apple-supplied
> Python 2.5
> >
> I don't know a single regular user of python on the mac who uses
> this 
> version. And the python developers specifically recommend
> against it.
>
> see http://www.python.org/download/mac/
>
> Does a fix for this exist yet that allows the builds on OS 10.5
> to /
> Library/Frameworks/Python.framework/Versions/Current/bin/python ?
>
> D.
>
>
> On 29/06/2009, at 2:30 AM, Victor.Lazzarini@... wrote:
>
> > The Python API on OSX works as elsewhere, as far as I can see.
> > There are no specific bugs to it, AFAIK. As far as building it,
> > if you have SWIG (a reasonably recent version), it will build OK,
> > without any issues.
> >
> > The major problem I see in building Csound is that there are lots
> > of dependencies; that's not a problem with Csound itself being
> > easy or not to build, but a question of having a reasonably
> > complete developer's system. On Linux, this is not an issue
> > as systems are generally complete and packages can be easily found
> > for everything. On OSX and Windows, you need to have a
> > developer's attitude to it.
> >
> > Victor
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: DavidW <vip@...>
> > Date: Sunday, June 28, 2009 5:20 pm
> > Subject: [Csnd] Re: Building Python API (was Re: : Score
> Alignment 
> > Utility)
> > To: csound@...
> >
> > >
> > > On 29/06/2009, at 1:47 AM, Michael Gogins wrote:
> > > ..
> > > > Where Csound differs from other SWIG-based extensions,
> > > perhaps, is
> > > > that we do not currently produce multiple versions of
> the 
> > extension
> > > > modules targetted to different versions of Python. Feel
> free to
> > > > contribute this to Csound, if you think it important enough.
> > > >
> > > Its not just a matter of importance.
> > > I won't be contributing code to csound until the development
> > > process
> > > is made more inclusive.
> > >
> > > > The SWIG approach has worked extremely well for us to date.
> > >
> > > Maybe. Depends how you define "us". My last experience was is
> > > that it
> > > was mysteriously buggy under OSX.
> > > > It would
> > > > be possible to move to boost::python or to ctypes, but
> both would
> > > > involve considerably more work. I suspect the
> boost::python 
> > approach
> > > > also would be harder to build and maintain.
> > > >
> > > I was not recommending that. I was simply asking if anyone
> > > had
> > > developed an alternative to the problems exhibited by the
> > > SWIG/SCons
> > > process on OSX.
> > >
> > > > I have Csound working with Python 2.6 on Windows, and the next
> > > Windows> release will be targetted for Python 2.6.
> > > >
> > > lucky for 'doze users!
> > >
> > > D.
> > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Mike
> > > >
> > > > On 6/28/09, DavidW <vip@...> wrote:
> > > >> On 28/06/2009, at 9:23 AM, victor wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> What do you mean? Should we move to Python 2.6?
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> Sorry if I wasn't clear. I'm not saying anything
> different to
> > > what I
> > > >> was saying on the dev-list for a couple of years. Maybe the
> > > issue is
> > > >> still discussed there; I don't know, I stopped reading it
> > > some time
> > > >> ago.
> > > >>
> > > >> Python APIs are useful for different reasons, including
> > > >> compositional/
> > > >> sonification/exhibtion etc etc (*), and in such application,
> > > csound
> > > >> is
> > > >> just another API whose explicit purpose is the
> > > synthesis/processing
> > > >> of
> > > >> sound. Other extensions include interfaces to 3 or 4 different
> > > >> database types, fast multidimensional array processing,
> graphical> > >> output, GUI, network applications, etc etc for
> all of
> > > which
> > > >> developers
> > > >> maintain versions that use eggs or at least easy_install
> > > that
> > > >> compile/
> > > >> install dependent on the _users_ version of python
> (within some
> > > >> backwards-compatibility window).
> > > >>
> > > >> Csound python API is a library _extension_ of python so in
> > > the
> > > >> general-
> > > >> to-specific usage model outlined above, it makes sense to
> > > ensure it
> > > >> independent of (or as easily compilable for) any particular
> > > version
> > > >> of
> > > >> python.  At the moment the interaction between csound
> > > and SCons seems
> > > >> to require some 'hand nursing' to produce an API for particular
> > > >> version of python and so if you want to integrate csound
> into 
> > your
> > > >> work you're restricted to the use of versions of python for
> > > which
> > > >> that
> > > >> nursing has been effected. Or if you're using an older
> > > version of
> > > >> python, you don't have access to the latest csound additions.
> > > >>
> > > >> IMO, that limitation is a debilitating one and limits
> the 
> > potential
> > > >> user base of csound;  most (serious) python users (a
> > > considerably>> larger user base than that of csound) simply will
> > > not entertain using
> > > >> csound while that limitation applied. Thankfully there
> are other
> > > >> alternatives, which, while they may not be as comprehensive
> > > as
> > > >> csound,
> > > >> are not dependent in the manner described.
> > > >>
> > > >> So, in short my answer to
> > > >>
> > > >>> Should we move to Python 2.6?
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> is that it doesn't matter. Most python users who maintain a
> > > body of
> > > >> code are probably already testing against v3.
> > > >> The solution must lie in the domain of generalising the
> > > build
> > > >> process.
> > > >>
> > > >> D.
> > > >>
> > > >> (*) Limiting music with computers to _sound_, will ensure
> > > it
> > > >> continues
> > > >> to suffer from the same problems that all Cartesian
> models do.
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> ________________________________________________
> > > >> David Worrall.
> > > >> - Experimental Polymedia: worrall.avatar.com.au
> > > >> - Sonification: www.sonifiction.com.au
> > > >> - Education for Financial Independence:
> www.mindthemarkets.com.au> > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> Send bugs reports to this list.
> > > >> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with
> > > body
> > > >> "unsubscribe
> > > >> csound"
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Michael Gogins
> > > > Irreducible Productions
> > > > http://www.michael-gogins.com
> > > > Michael dot Gogins at gmail dot com
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Send bugs reports to this list.
> > > > To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with
> > > body
> > > > "unsubscribe csound"
> > >
> > > ________________________________________________
> > > David Worrall.
> > > - Experimental Polymedia: www.avatar.com.au
> > > - Education for Financial Independence: www.mindthemarkets.com.au
> > > Australian research affiliations:
> > > - Capital Markets Cooperative Research Centre: www.cmcrc.com
> > > - Sonic Communications Research
> Group: creative.canberra.edu.au/scrg> > - MARCS Auditory
> Laboratories: marcs.uws.edu.au
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Send bugs reports to this list.
> > > To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body
> > > "unsubscribe csound"
> >
> > Dr Victor Lazzarini, Senior Lecturer, Dept. of Music,
> > National University of Ireland, Maynooth
>
> ________________________________________________
> David Worrall.
> - Experimental Polymedia: www.avatar.com.au
> - Education for Financial Independence: www.mindthemarkets.com.au
> Australian research affiliations:
> - Capital Markets Cooperative Research Centre: www.cmcrc.com
> - Sonic Communications Research Group: creative.canberra.edu.au/scrg
> - MARCS Auditory Laboratories: marcs.uws.edu.au
>
>
>
>
>
> Send bugs reports to this list.
> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body
> "unsubscribe csound"

Dr Victor Lazzarini, Senior Lecturer, Dept. of Music,
National University of Ireland, Maynooth

[Felipe Sateler]

On 28/06/2009, DavidW <vip@...> wrote:

> I might be horribly out of date because I stopped struggling with the API a
> while ago. Anyway, as I see it, there are two main tasks and a development
> process issue. I think it is unnecessarily difficult, and not very
> efficient, for one person to try to solve these build and distribute issues
> for versions, all platforms.
>
> 1. Begin with the latest versions of SCons and python. Solve the SCons build
> problems - probably on a platform by platform basis.  It's a while since I
> played with the SCons build so I can't remember the specifics. Anyway,
> you're the most experienced at the build, so I don't know I can add anything
> to what you already know.
>
> 2. Develop user downloadable "easy_install" install.py file(s) (or better
> still python eggs which pulls all the necessary stuff from the repository,+
> the right version of numpy if the API is now dependent on it etc).  The
> user, irrespective of the version of python they have installed,  just types
> "python install.py".

I still wonder why regular users need to bother with building csound.
There is *no* need for that.
Just to make it clear: you do *not* need to build csound to use the
API. Unless the binary packages for OSX and Windows don't install the
headers (which I'd be surprised to learn they don't).

>
> 3.  There needs to be a willingness to make the build process inclusive of
> more users. That is a development 'policy' issue. I've been there before so
> I won't bang on. I'd start by cleaning up what's downloaded. Last time I
> looked the csound root directory was a dog's breakfast to any but the most
> frequent visitors.  Csound already has a steep learning curve, so there's no
> reasonable reason why it should be made steeper by having to avoid other
> people's litter.  If you want people to share a workshop then workshop
> tidiness is essential.  I'd start by tossing out everything that is not API
> related and make sure file names reflect their functions  and platform
> restrictions. Boring stuff, I know.

Any relatively large project is "dog's breakfast" to newcomers.


BTW, I do agree the csound build system is less than optimal, but it
is not easy to cater for all use cases. Anyways, it is not that hard
either: setup the appropriate environment (ie, install all needed
dependencies), setup your path and specific flags in custom.py and run
scons with the wanted flags. If you have build errors, report them so
that the minimum versions of dependencies are adjusted or the problem
is fixed within csound.

Saludos,
Felipe Sateler


Send bugs reports to this list.
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body "unsubscribe csound"

[Jacob Joaquin]

Felipe Sateler wrote:

I still wonder why regular users need to bother with building csound.
There is *no* need for that.
Just to make it clear: you do *not* need to build csound to use the
API. Unless the binary packages for OSX and Windows don't install the
headers (which I'd be surprised to learn they don't).

Python does not work with the Csound API on my system. So I have to build it to use it.

Felipe Sateler wrote:

BTW, I do agree the csound build system is less than optimal, but it
is not easy to cater for all use cases. Anyways, it is not that hard
either: setup the appropriate environment (ie, install all needed
dependencies), setup your path and specific flags in custom.py and run
scons with the wanted flags. If you have build errors, report them so
that the minimum versions of dependencies are adjusted or the problem
is fixed within csound.

Hard is a relative term.  Setting up the appropriate environment, dependencies, paths, flags, etc...  There  are lots of people who have no clue how to interact with these technical hurdles, who are still very capable of writing Csound and python code.  Generally speaking, for every obstacle there is to get Csound up and running, we lose potential Csounders.  Unfortunately, Csound has more obstacles than just about anything else out in the wild.

For all the time and hard work the developers and other put into Csound (which I truly appreciate), much of it is wasted because of often unnecessary technical hurdles for newbies.  There are some technical issues that may never be eliminated, I understand this, but there is certainly much streamlining that can be done.  I'm willing to do my part.

Plus, Csound isn't the only game in town, anymore;  It's hard enough to get people to give Csound a try with other great music tools such as MaxMSP, Supercollider, ChucK, Reaktor, Ableton Live, etc...  If we want to grow the Csound community, we have knock off this technical elite attitude, and start looking at Csound through the eyes of newbies.  

My two cents.
Jake

[Stéphane Rollandin]

> Plus, Csound isn't the only game in town, anymore;  It's hard enough to get
> people to give Csound a try with other great music tools such as MaxMSP,
> Supercollider, ChucK, Reaktor, Ableton Live, etc...  If we want to grow the
> Csound community, we have knock off this technical elite attitude, and start
> looking at Csound through the eyes of newbies.  

Csound is very different from the others you list. It is more low-level,
and more powerful IMO. What we would need is a friendly layer above it
exposing its power in a clean and simple way to newbies, or simply
composers that are not fond of assembly programming. To me it would be
another system altogether. Some attempts have been made, from Blue to
Cecilia or older stuff like PatchWork and many others. These are/were
all individual projects so they have limited scope and lack the manpower
required to build a Reaktor clone.

So, to summarize, the technical elite attitude you regret mirrors the
actual technical nature of Csound itself. I don't think it can be very
much more newbie friendly.

What I do believe is that a whole other project is needed to wrap Csound
within a full-blown composition system. But for this to happen we need a
group of motivated people, sharing a common vision of what such a system
should be. This is very challenging.

Personnaly I have my own one-person thing, Surmulot, developed along the
lines I just exposed: it is very easy to install (just unzip the
archive), it has graphical front-ends for score, orchestra and
envelopes, a powerful textual front-end (Emacs), algorithmic tools, high
level languages for composing (Lisp and Smalltalk). But it definitely is
not friendly to newbies. Could be made so, maybe, sometime...



Stef



Send bugs reports to this list.
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body "unsubscribe csound"

[csounder]

I can't agree more.

We desperately need a simple *installable* Windows version of Csound5  
with the QuteCsound front-end - as part of the package.

I can't tell you how many Electronic Musicians, Synth Majors, Synth  
professor, and very skilled and
Experienced Computer Music/Electronic Music colleagues - just give  
UP!  When common sense fails,
when logic fails, when professional standards are not met... they move  
on - to the TONS of other
great and powerful tools at their disposal.

At least there is NOW a Macintosh version that simple installs in a  
clean and professional way, although
one has to find and know to install QuteCsound too... and even then,  
there is confusion about which version
will work with which version and platform.

Hopefully Michael Gogins can deliver a binary distribution that just  
installs and works and contains what is necessary
to do study, learn, and use Csound with an affordable PC running  
Windows XT and/or Vista

-dB


On Jul 2, 2009, at 1:37 PM, Jacob Joaquin wrote:

>
>
> Felipe Sateler wrote:
>>
>> I still wonder why regular users need to bother with building csound.
>> There is *no* need for that.
>> Just to make it clear: you do *not* need to build csound to use the
>> API. Unless the binary packages for OSX and Windows don't install the
>> headers (which I'd be surprised to learn they don't).
>>
>
> Python does not work with the Csound API on my system. So I have to  
> build it
> to use it.
>
>
> Felipe Sateler wrote:
>>
>> BTW, I do agree the csound build system is less than optimal, but it
>> is not easy to cater for all use cases. Anyways, it is not that hard
>> either: setup the appropriate environment (ie, install all needed
>> dependencies), setup your path and specific flags in custom.py and  
>> run
>> scons with the wanted flags. If you have build errors, report them so
>> that the minimum versions of dependencies are adjusted or the problem
>> is fixed within csound.
>>
>
> Hard is a relative term.  Setting up the appropriate environment,
> dependencies, paths, flags, etc...  There  are lots of people who  
> have no
> clue how to interact with these technical hurdles, who are still very
> capable of writing Csound and python code.  Generally speaking, for  
> every
> obstacle there is to get Csound up and running, we lose potential  
> Csounders.
> Unfortunately, Csound has more obstacles than just about anything  
> else out
> in the wild.
>
> For all the time and hard work the developers and other put into  
> Csound
> (which I truly appreciate), much of it is wasted because of often
> unnecessary technical hurdles for newbies.  There are some technical  
> issues
> that may never be eliminated, I understand this, but there is  
> certainly much
> streamlining that can be done.  I'm willing to do my part.
>
> Plus, Csound isn't the only game in town, anymore;  It's hard enough  
> to get
> people to give Csound a try with other great music tools such as  
> MaxMSP,
> Supercollider, ChucK, Reaktor, Ableton Live, etc...  If we want to  
> grow the
> Csound community, we have knock off this technical elite attitude,  
> and start
> looking at Csound through the eyes of newbies.
>
> My two cents.
> Jake
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Score-Alignment-Utility-tp24227460p24311001.html
> Sent from the Csound - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>
>
> Send bugs reports to this list.
> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body  
> "unsubscribe csound"

Send bugs reports to this list.
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body "unsubscribe csound"

[Dr. Richard Boulanger]

There is Blue.  There is Lettuce.  and they are  great.
In fact, over the years, there have been many wonderful Windows front-
ends that integrate powerful compositional/work-flow environments
and they have been wonderful in their way too.

BUT...

A beginner needs to be able to download and install Csound - for their  
PC especially - and have a version that will let them at least explore  
it some.

So happy that that situation has been somewhat remedied for the Mac  
(thanks to Victor Lazzarini and Andreas Cabrera's work),
but it is still a bit of a nightmare and showstopper for Windows.

I have a blind student getting started with his Windows PC and  
Csound.... he uses the Jaws program to read the PC displays to him.
It works great with all his softwware... It just to us (took ME - mr  
Csound) two weeks to get the latest Csound running on his laptop!

Like Art, I have resorted to older versions of the program that just  
worked on Windows... John ffitch's original Winsound from
The Csound Book and Csound Catalog!  (thanks John)

uuuuugggghhhhh - getting a Windows version that was up to date  
running.... nice........ NOT!

I did a workshop in Korea last year.  All the professors and grad  
students are inspired and rush home to install and try Csound.

They all come back the next day - NO ONE got it running!  NO ONE!!!

Next week, I am doing a workshop at Berklee for gifted High School  
students... Most of them will have PCs....

Last year... I gave out a Prize - the Csound Book - to the student who  
could get it running on their PC and make Toot1.
Of the 40+ API advanced Physics Science Prize nerds there.... ONE  
student succeeded - and it took ALL night.

This year... well I have my fingers crossed that Michael might get  
something happening with Andres' QuteCsound in time.

I'll let you know... But.. truly... it is sad that Windows beginners/
users/curious (regardless of their experience level)
can't ever really get started...

maybe deep down... we don't want them to?  maybe... it makes us more  
special?

I hope not.... because I want everyone to get it?  to get infected  
with the mind-opening and ear-expanding power of Csound

-dB


On Jul 2, 2009, at 2:24 PM, Stéphane Rollandin wrote:

>> Plus, Csound isn't the only game in town, anymore;  It's hard  
>> enough to get
>> people to give Csound a try with other great music tools such as  
>> MaxMSP,
>> Supercollider, ChucK, Reaktor, Ableton Live, etc...  If we want to  
>> grow the
>> Csound community, we have knock off this technical elite attitude,  
>> and start
>> looking at Csound through the eyes of newbies.
>
> Csound is very different from the others you list. It is more low-
> level, and more powerful IMO. What we would need is a friendly layer  
> above it exposing its power in a clean and simple way to newbies, or  
> simply composers that are not fond of assembly programming. To me it  
> would be another system altogether. Some attempts have been made,  
> from Blue to Cecilia or older stuff like PatchWork and many others.  
> These are/were all individual projects so they have limited scope  
> and lack the manpower required to build a Reaktor clone.
>
> So, to summarize, the technical elite attitude you regret mirrors  
> the actual technical nature of Csound itself. I don't think it can  
> be very much more newbie friendly.
>
> What I do believe is that a whole other project is needed to wrap  
> Csound within a full-blown composition system. But for this to  
> happen we need a group of motivated people, sharing a common vision  
> of what such a system should be. This is very challenging.
>
> Personnaly I have my own one-person thing, Surmulot, developed along  
> the lines I just exposed: it is very easy to install (just unzip the  
> archive), it has graphical front-ends for score, orchestra and  
> envelopes, a powerful textual front-end (Emacs), algorithmic tools,  
> high level languages for composing (Lisp and Smalltalk). But it  
> definitely is not friendly to newbies. Could be made so, maybe,  
> sometime...
>
>
>
> Stef
>
>
>
> Send bugs reports to this list.
> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body  
> "unsubscribe csound"

Send bugs reports to this list.
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body "unsubscribe csound"

[Caecos]

Hi,

Just to let you know that I never had problems of this sort when installing
Csound in Windows. It works «out of the box» and I am not a PC wizard...

Can you tell us what the fundamental problem is? Or maybe they experience
different problems...

Regards,

Marc

p.s. In my case I have more problems with Windows... Last night I have
installed the Vista SP2 in one of my laptop and it stops working. I love you
Bill...

-----Message d'origine-----
De : Dr. Richard Boulanger [mailto:richardboulanger@...]
Envoyé : 2 juillet 2009 14:42
À : csound@...
Objet : [Csnd] WE Desperately NEED a Simple Installer/Build for Windows with
QuteCsound (was: Building Python API (was: Score Alignment Utility)

There is Blue.  There is Lettuce.  and they are  great.
In fact, over the years, there have been many wonderful Windows front-
ends that integrate powerful compositional/work-flow environments
and they have been wonderful in their way too.

BUT...

A beginner needs to be able to download and install Csound - for their  
PC especially - and have a version that will let them at least explore  
it some.

So happy that that situation has been somewhat remedied for the Mac  
(thanks to Victor Lazzarini and Andreas Cabrera's work),
but it is still a bit of a nightmare and showstopper for Windows.

I have a blind student getting started with his Windows PC and  
Csound.... he uses the Jaws program to read the PC displays to him.
It works great with all his softwware... It just to us (took ME - mr  
Csound) two weeks to get the latest Csound running on his laptop!

Like Art, I have resorted to older versions of the program that just  
worked on Windows... John ffitch's original Winsound from
The Csound Book and Csound Catalog!  (thanks John)

uuuuugggghhhhh - getting a Windows version that was up to date  
running.... nice........ NOT!

I did a workshop in Korea last year.  All the professors and grad  
students are inspired and rush home to install and try Csound.

They all come back the next day - NO ONE got it running!  NO ONE!!!

Next week, I am doing a workshop at Berklee for gifted High School  
students... Most of them will have PCs....

Last year... I gave out a Prize - the Csound Book - to the student who  
could get it running on their PC and make Toot1.
Of the 40+ API advanced Physics Science Prize nerds there.... ONE  
student succeeded - and it took ALL night.

This year... well I have my fingers crossed that Michael might get  
something happening with Andres' QuteCsound in time.

I'll let you know... But.. truly... it is sad that Windows beginners/
users/curious (regardless of their experience level)
can't ever really get started...

maybe deep down... we don't want them to?  maybe... it makes us more  
special?

I hope not.... because I want everyone to get it?  to get infected  
with the mind-opening and ear-expanding power of Csound

-dB


On Jul 2, 2009, at 2:24 PM, Stéphane Rollandin wrote:

>> Plus, Csound isn't the only game in town, anymore;  It's hard  
>> enough to get
>> people to give Csound a try with other great music tools such as  
>> MaxMSP,
>> Supercollider, ChucK, Reaktor, Ableton Live, etc...  If we want to  
>> grow the
>> Csound community, we have knock off this technical elite attitude,  
>> and start
>> looking at Csound through the eyes of newbies.
>
> Csound is very different from the others you list. It is more low-
> level, and more powerful IMO. What we would need is a friendly layer  
> above it exposing its power in a clean and simple way to newbies, or  
> simply composers that are not fond of assembly programming. To me it  
> would be another system altogether. Some attempts have been made,  
> from Blue to Cecilia or older stuff like PatchWork and many others.  
> These are/were all individual projects so they have limited scope  
> and lack the manpower required to build a Reaktor clone.
>
> So, to summarize, the technical elite attitude you regret mirrors  
> the actual technical nature of Csound itself. I don't think it can  
> be very much more newbie friendly.
>
> What I do believe is that a whole other project is needed to wrap  
> Csound within a full-blown composition system. But for this to  
> happen we need a group of motivated people, sharing a common vision  
> of what such a system should be. This is very challenging.
>
> Personnaly I have my own one-person thing, Surmulot, developed along  
> the lines I just exposed: it is very easy to install (just unzip the  
> archive), it has graphical front-ends for score, orchestra and  
> envelopes, a powerful textual front-end (Emacs), algorithmic tools,  
> high level languages for composing (Lisp and Smalltalk). But it  
> definitely is not friendly to newbies. Could be made so, maybe,  
> sometime...
>
>
>
> Stef
>
>
>
> Send bugs reports to this list.
> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body  
> "unsubscribe csound"

Send bugs reports to this list.
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body "unsubscribe
csound"



Send bugs reports to this list.
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body "unsubscribe csound"

[Michael Gogins-2]

I really don't understand the difficulty with the Windows installers.
I routinely test it at home and at work; and at work, i uninstall
Csound before installing it again. It always just runs out of the box.

Are all of the difficulties that people have because of Python? I'd
appreciate a specific list of problems that people have, preferably
with screen shots of error messages and such.

I need more information! "Doesn't work" or "Took all day" is not helpful.

I can't fix a problem that I can't reproduce...

Best,
Mike

On 7/2/09, Dr. Richard Boulanger <richardboulanger@...> wrote:

> There is Blue.  There is Lettuce.  and they are  great.
> In fact, over the years, there have been many wonderful Windows front-
> ends that integrate powerful compositional/work-flow environments
> and they have been wonderful in their way too.
>
> BUT...
>
> A beginner needs to be able to download and install Csound - for their
> PC especially - and have a version that will let them at least explore
> it some.
>
> So happy that that situation has been somewhat remedied for the Mac
> (thanks to Victor Lazzarini and Andreas Cabrera's work),
> but it is still a bit of a nightmare and showstopper for Windows.
>
> I have a blind student getting started with his Windows PC and
> Csound.... he uses the Jaws program to read the PC displays to him.
> It works great with all his softwware... It just to us (took ME - mr
> Csound) two weeks to get the latest Csound running on his laptop!
>
> Like Art, I have resorted to older versions of the program that just
> worked on Windows... John ffitch's original Winsound from
> The Csound Book and Csound Catalog!  (thanks John)
>
> uuuuugggghhhhh - getting a Windows version that was up to date
> running.... nice........ NOT!
>
> I did a workshop in Korea last year.  All the professors and grad
> students are inspired and rush home to install and try Csound.
>
> They all come back the next day - NO ONE got it running!  NO ONE!!!
>
> Next week, I am doing a workshop at Berklee for gifted High School
> students... Most of them will have PCs....
>
> Last year... I gave out a Prize - the Csound Book - to the student who
> could get it running on their PC and make Toot1.
> Of the 40+ API advanced Physics Science Prize nerds there.... ONE
> student succeeded - and it took ALL night.
>
> This year... well I have my fingers crossed that Michael might get
> something happening with Andres' QuteCsound in time.
>
> I'll let you know... But.. truly... it is sad that Windows beginners/
> users/curious (regardless of their experience level)
> can't ever really get started...
>
> maybe deep down... we don't want them to?  maybe... it makes us more
> special?
>
> I hope not.... because I want everyone to get it?  to get infected
> with the mind-opening and ear-expanding power of Csound
>
> -dB
>
>
> On Jul 2, 2009, at 2:24 PM, Stéphane Rollandin wrote:
>
>>> Plus, Csound isn't the only game in town, anymore;  It's hard
>>> enough to get
>>> people to give Csound a try with other great music tools such as
>>> MaxMSP,
>>> Supercollider, ChucK, Reaktor, Ableton Live, etc...  If we want to
>>> grow the
>>> Csound community, we have knock off this technical elite attitude,
>>> and start
>>> looking at Csound through the eyes of newbies.
>>
>> Csound is very different from the others you list. It is more low-
>> level, and more powerful IMO. What we would need is a friendly layer
>> above it exposing its power in a clean and simple way to newbies, or
>> simply composers that are not fond of assembly programming. To me it
>> would be another system altogether. Some attempts have been made,
>> from Blue to Cecilia or older stuff like PatchWork and many others.
>> These are/were all individual projects so they have limited scope
>> and lack the manpower required to build a Reaktor clone.
>>
>> So, to summarize, the technical elite attitude you regret mirrors
>> the actual technical nature of Csound itself. I don't think it can
>> be very much more newbie friendly.
>>
>> What I do believe is that a whole other project is needed to wrap
>> Csound within a full-blown composition system. But for this to
>> happen we need a group of motivated people, sharing a common vision
>> of what such a system should be. This is very challenging.
>>
>> Personnaly I have my own one-person thing, Surmulot, developed along
>> the lines I just exposed: it is very easy to install (just unzip the
>> archive), it has graphical front-ends for score, orchestra and
>> envelopes, a powerful textual front-end (Emacs), algorithmic tools,
>> high level languages for composing (Lisp and Smalltalk). But it
>> definitely is not friendly to newbies. Could be made so, maybe,
>> sometime...
>>
>>
>>
>> Stef
>>
>>
>>
>> Send bugs reports to this list.
>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body
>> "unsubscribe csound"
>
>
>
> Send bugs reports to this list.
> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body "unsubscribe
> csound"

--
Michael Gogins
Irreducible Productions
http://www.michael-gogins.com
Michael dot Gogins at gmail dot com


Send bugs reports to this list.
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body "unsubscribe csound"

[Art Hunkins]

Mike and Rick,

The *only* problems I've run into with the 5.10 float installer are the ones
I detailed in a recent email.

I'm not sure why Mike can't reproduce these; perhaps he hasn't tested the
float version in real time (from the command line)and tried to exit with
CTRL-C?

Regarding other non-Python-version-related issues: one possible
simplification for newbees would be a variation on the Super-Compact Csound
distro I proposed in a recent mail: a single zip, expanded to a single
directory - perhaps on a USB drive - running from that directory only. If a
frontend were desired, unzip to the same directory. (Or perhaps the frontend
and the Super-Compact Csound could even be in the same zip?)

No environment variables; no installer; different versions of Csound can
coexist without problems.

My two cents.

Art Hunkins

----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Gogins" <michael.gogins@...>
To: <csound@...>
Sent: Thursday, July 02, 2009 5:08 PM
Subject: [Csnd] Re: WE Desperately NEED a Simple Installer/Build for
Windowswith QuteCsound (was: Building Python API (was: Score Alignment
Utility)


I really don't understand the difficulty with the Windows installers.
I routinely test it at home and at work; and at work, i uninstall
Csound before installing it again. It always just runs out of the box.

Are all of the difficulties that people have because of Python? I'd
appreciate a specific list of problems that people have, preferably
with screen shots of error messages and such.

I need more information! "Doesn't work" or "Took all day" is not helpful.

I can't fix a problem that I can't reproduce...

Best,
Mike

On 7/2/09, Dr. Richard Boulanger <richardboulanger@...> wrote:

> There is Blue.  There is Lettuce.  and they are  great.
> In fact, over the years, there have been many wonderful Windows front-
> ends that integrate powerful compositional/work-flow environments
> and they have been wonderful in their way too.
>
> BUT...
>
> A beginner needs to be able to download and install Csound - for their
> PC especially - and have a version that will let them at least explore
> it some.
>
> So happy that that situation has been somewhat remedied for the Mac
> (thanks to Victor Lazzarini and Andreas Cabrera's work),
> but it is still a bit of a nightmare and showstopper for Windows.
>
> I have a blind student getting started with his Windows PC and
> Csound.... he uses the Jaws program to read the PC displays to him.
> It works great with all his softwware... It just to us (took ME - mr
> Csound) two weeks to get the latest Csound running on his laptop!
>
> Like Art, I have resorted to older versions of the program that just
> worked on Windows... John ffitch's original Winsound from
> The Csound Book and Csound Catalog!  (thanks John)
>
> uuuuugggghhhhh - getting a Windows version that was up to date
> running.... nice........ NOT!
>
> I did a workshop in Korea last year.  All the professors and grad
> students are inspired and rush home to install and try Csound.
>
> They all come back the next day - NO ONE got it running!  NO ONE!!!
>
> Next week, I am doing a workshop at Berklee for gifted High School
> students... Most of them will have PCs....
>
> Last year... I gave out a Prize - the Csound Book - to the student who
> could get it running on their PC and make Toot1.
> Of the 40+ API advanced Physics Science Prize nerds there.... ONE
> student succeeded - and it took ALL night.
>
> This year... well I have my fingers crossed that Michael might get
> something happening with Andres' QuteCsound in time.
>
> I'll let you know... But.. truly... it is sad that Windows beginners/
> users/curious (regardless of their experience level)
> can't ever really get started...
>
> maybe deep down... we don't want them to?  maybe... it makes us more
> special?
>
> I hope not.... because I want everyone to get it?  to get infected
> with the mind-opening and ear-expanding power of Csound
>
> -dB
>
>
> On Jul 2, 2009, at 2:24 PM, Stéphane Rollandin wrote:
>
>>> Plus, Csound isn't the only game in town, anymore;  It's hard
>>> enough to get
>>> people to give Csound a try with other great music tools such as
>>> MaxMSP,
>>> Supercollider, ChucK, Reaktor, Ableton Live, etc...  If we want to
>>> grow the
>>> Csound community, we have knock off this technical elite attitude,
>>> and start
>>> looking at Csound through the eyes of newbies.
>>
>> Csound is very different from the others you list. It is more low-
>> level, and more powerful IMO. What we would need is a friendly layer
>> above it exposing its power in a clean and simple way to newbies, or
>> simply composers that are not fond of assembly programming. To me it
>> would be another system altogether. Some attempts have been made,
>> from Blue to Cecilia or older stuff like PatchWork and many others.
>> These are/were all individual projects so they have limited scope
>> and lack the manpower required to build a Reaktor clone.
>>
>> So, to summarize, the technical elite attitude you regret mirrors
>> the actual technical nature of Csound itself. I don't think it can
>> be very much more newbie friendly.
>>
>> What I do believe is that a whole other project is needed to wrap
>> Csound within a full-blown composition system. But for this to
>> happen we need a group of motivated people, sharing a common vision
>> of what such a system should be. This is very challenging.
>>
>> Personnaly I have my own one-person thing, Surmulot, developed along
>> the lines I just exposed: it is very easy to install (just unzip the
>> archive), it has graphical front-ends for score, orchestra and
>> envelopes, a powerful textual front-end (Emacs), algorithmic tools,
>> high level languages for composing (Lisp and Smalltalk). But it
>> definitely is not friendly to newbies. Could be made so, maybe,
>> sometime...
>>
>>
>>
>> Stef
>>
>>
>>
>> Send bugs reports to this list.
>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body
>> "unsubscribe csound"
>
>
>
> Send bugs reports to this list.
> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body "unsubscribe
> csound"

--
Michael Gogins
Irreducible Productions
http://www.michael-gogins.com
Michael dot Gogins at gmail dot com


Send bugs reports to this list.
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body "unsubscribe
csound"=



Send bugs reports to this list.
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body "unsubscribe csound"

[csounder]

I will go through the process again here this weekend - on two  
machines - and let you know specifically.
I will also have my student assistant - Nicolas - who worked with  
Ozgur - to detail all the problems that he had.
(I think that most of them involved Python)

But also worth noting is the fact that - Art Hunkins - a serious PC-
based Csounder, has also reported that
he isn't able to work with the latest versions and has resorted to  
older versions and some subset.

I am just wondering if we can't support a Base Versions - with a  
standard front-end (like QuteCsound) for all platforms
that simply installs on the machine with by double-clicking on a  
single package file.

-dB

On Jul 2, 2009, at 5:08 PM, Michael Gogins wrote:

> I really don't understand the difficulty with the Windows installers.
> I routinely test it at home and at work; and at work, i uninstall
> Csound before installing it again. It always just runs out of the box.
>
> Are all of the difficulties that people have because of Python? I'd
> appreciate a specific list of problems that people have, preferably
> with screen shots of error messages and such.
>
> I need more information! "Doesn't work" or "Took all day" is not  
> helpful.
>
> I can't fix a problem that I can't reproduce...
>
> Best,
> Mike
>
> On 7/2/09, Dr. Richard Boulanger <richardboulanger@...> wrote:
>> There is Blue.  There is Lettuce.  and they are  great.
>> In fact, over the years, there have been many wonderful Windows  
>> front-
>> ends that integrate powerful compositional/work-flow environments
>> and they have been wonderful in their way too.
>>
>> BUT...
>>
>> A beginner needs to be able to download and install Csound - for  
>> their
>> PC especially - and have a version that will let them at least  
>> explore
>> it some.
>>
>> So happy that that situation has been somewhat remedied for the Mac
>> (thanks to Victor Lazzarini and Andreas Cabrera's work),
>> but it is still a bit of a nightmare and showstopper for Windows.
>>
>> I have a blind student getting started with his Windows PC and
>> Csound.... he uses the Jaws program to read the PC displays to him.
>> It works great with all his softwware... It just to us (took ME - mr
>> Csound) two weeks to get the latest Csound running on his laptop!
>>
>> Like Art, I have resorted to older versions of the program that just
>> worked on Windows... John ffitch's original Winsound from
>> The Csound Book and Csound Catalog!  (thanks John)
>>
>> uuuuugggghhhhh - getting a Windows version that was up to date
>> running.... nice........ NOT!
>>
>> I did a workshop in Korea last year.  All the professors and grad
>> students are inspired and rush home to install and try Csound.
>>
>> They all come back the next day - NO ONE got it running!  NO ONE!!!
>>
>> Next week, I am doing a workshop at Berklee for gifted High School
>> students... Most of them will have PCs....
>>
>> Last year... I gave out a Prize - the Csound Book - to the student  
>> who
>> could get it running on their PC and make Toot1.
>> Of the 40+ API advanced Physics Science Prize nerds there.... ONE
>> student succeeded - and it took ALL night.
>>
>> This year... well I have my fingers crossed that Michael might get
>> something happening with Andres' QuteCsound in time.
>>
>> I'll let you know... But.. truly... it is sad that Windows beginners/
>> users/curious (regardless of their experience level)
>> can't ever really get started...
>>
>> maybe deep down... we don't want them to?  maybe... it makes us more
>> special?
>>
>> I hope not.... because I want everyone to get it?  to get infected
>> with the mind-opening and ear-expanding power of Csound
>>
>> -dB
>>
>>
>> On Jul 2, 2009, at 2:24 PM, Stéphane Rollandin wrote:
>>
>>>> Plus, Csound isn't the only game in town, anymore;  It's hard
>>>> enough to get
>>>> people to give Csound a try with other great music tools such as
>>>> MaxMSP,
>>>> Supercollider, ChucK, Reaktor, Ableton Live, etc...  If we want to
>>>> grow the
>>>> Csound community, we have knock off this technical elite attitude,
>>>> and start
>>>> looking at Csound through the eyes of newbies.
>>>
>>> Csound is very different from the others you list. It is more low-
>>> level, and more powerful IMO. What we would need is a friendly layer
>>> above it exposing its power in a clean and simple way to newbies, or
>>> simply composers that are not fond of assembly programming. To me it
>>> would be another system altogether. Some attempts have been made,
>>> from Blue to Cecilia or older stuff like PatchWork and many others.
>>> These are/were all individual projects so they have limited scope
>>> and lack the manpower required to build a Reaktor clone.
>>>
>>> So, to summarize, the technical elite attitude you regret mirrors
>>> the actual technical nature of Csound itself. I don't think it can
>>> be very much more newbie friendly.
>>>
>>> What I do believe is that a whole other project is needed to wrap
>>> Csound within a full-blown composition system. But for this to
>>> happen we need a group of motivated people, sharing a common vision
>>> of what such a system should be. This is very challenging.
>>>
>>> Personnaly I have my own one-person thing, Surmulot, developed along
>>> the lines I just exposed: it is very easy to install (just unzip the
>>> archive), it has graphical front-ends for score, orchestra and
>>> envelopes, a powerful textual front-end (Emacs), algorithmic tools,
>>> high level languages for composing (Lisp and Smalltalk). But it
>>> definitely is not friendly to newbies. Could be made so, maybe,
>>> sometime...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Stef
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Send bugs reports to this list.
>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body
>>> "unsubscribe csound"
>>
>>
>>
>> Send bugs reports to this list.
>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body  
>> "unsubscribe
>> csound"
>
>
> --
> Michael Gogins
> Irreducible Productions
> http://www.michael-gogins.com
> Michael dot Gogins at gmail dot com
>
>
> Send bugs reports to this list.
> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body  
> "unsubscribe csound"

Send bugs reports to this list.
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body "unsubscribe csound"