Koen wrote:
>Is anyone working on the improvement of the saolc compiler as far as speed
>is concerned ?
I'm working on a new saol runtime. You can read some of my musings here:
http://www.audiomulch.com/sa/run/
This is an alpha site :-)
At the moment I'm close to completing the parser, which uses a modified
saolc grammar to generate a C++ abstract syntax tree. The tree is strongly
typed (different classes for different node types (expression, binop etc
etc) and uses the Visitor pattern (see Gamma et al.) to implement tree
travaersal. This should make it very easy to plug in different optimisation
and code generation modules.
The project is open source LGPLed so I'd be happy for anyone to contribute
or use the code for whatever.
I'll post here when I have a first draft of the parser finished.
>Another reason why I'd like to go into it is that I still don't understand
>why the score needs to be written in a separate file. Is there one good
>reason to do so ?
I think traditionally people used different scores with the same orc, but I
aggree. I would suggest adopting some sort of standard XML markup to
differentiate score and orc sections in the same file the same way csound
does with .csd.
>in brief I can't
>write the output of my never ending routine to a file. If on the other hand
>I would be able to generate the score inside the saolc program, then there
>would be no need for such a file.
Well I guess this is a separate issue. You can use the instr statement in
saol to schedule new notes.
Best wishes,
Ross.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed May 10 2000 - 12:15:45 EDT