pouët.net

why do you care if there is one or not?

What is it?

I merely asked because I thought it might exist due to ignorance of the platform. It's just Java afterall...

i didn't know that it existed two days ago and I am still not sure what it is

zefyros: http://processing.org/

parapete: perhaps to you it's just java afterall. perhaps to others it's a platform of it's own. perhaps to some flash is also just a library aswell. perhaps i shouldnt feel insulted that you just called me an ignorant. and yet i feel you're the one who is being an ignorant and a dickhead to boot. -3 points to you as far as i'm concearned. got any actual arguments?

ps, apologies for the hostility in my post but I thought you had opened a thread purely because of my oneliner post; I had not seen the comments for the prod that we're talking about.

In any case, you could be more tactful about how you discuss this, rather than opening a thread with one sentence which implies that it's no-one else's business. Your Flash argument doesn't hold up either as Flash itself is not a library but an environment like Java. Adding Processing as a category in addition to Java is like adding Papervision3D in addition to Flash.

a processing category is just as sensible/senseless as java/flash categories. i'd rather see categorization in the gpu department before we split up software platforms, but that's just my 2c.

its just java after all

ps, also I wouldn't care so much if it wasn't for the randomness with which this kind of administration is done. For example, is a 'Processing' category more pressing than a 4k procedural graphics type?

To me, processing is kind of werkkzeug. Do we have a werkkzeug category?

This summer I released a java demo, I added windows/mac/linux categories because I though it applied to them, some admin changed it and left it as just java. I understood the reasoning behind the action. But I don't undertand very well why now we need a category for a api. If you want to have a lot of categories, fine, if you don't want to have them, fine too. but choose.

However, I kind of see the point, not too many people know that processign is java in the end. And if some guy that did processing stuff wanted to look for other processing pieces maybe they won't find them because they are in the java category... right. But, anyway, as far as I know, if someone go seriously on processing they'll end up jumping to java.

In the end, I don't know what's right in this case, but I hope my thinking is giving some idea of how to tackle this one.

the toolchain might be processing, but the end product is just java. we dont have visual c++ category either.

I don't have anything against this category but, like parapete, I think that consistency in matters like this would be nice. Not just in new categories/platforms but also other stuff, sometimes ports of demos are added as new entires, sometimes just under the old entry etc...

Some might say that there shouldn't be a new category yet since there's only one prod and I can understand their frustration, especially if "their favorite platform" doesn't have a category of it's own but eh.. who cares, it's not like we're gonna run out of slots for new categories and it does provide additional information about the prod.

I thought the exact same thing.

So, it's seriously funny that Processing is considered a platform now. Even that demo's "code" and "lib" directories contain .jar files. That said, it's quite obvious that Processing is a framework for creating audio-visual Java applications.

If we really want this kind of things to be seen, maybe we can have a "tools used" box for prods?

Add qbasic category now :)

parapete: the only reason there isnt a 4k porocedural graphics is no one handed in a icon yet.

Hmm, after reading the page I think it's quite daft to have such a category, but I also think that Minnie the Minx put it quite well.

minx: actually we been trying to merge all ports of prods down to single entry (unless they're actually diferent versions) but the problem is some older prods have shitloads of comments that only make sense applied to the port and not the original, so its a bitch to merge, i been doing it gradually when i find myself with some more free time but as you can imagine i'm not always very motivated to invest time on it. as for new categories addition criteria, the whole category types will be remodelled with sub-categories and such for v2 of pouet, which should come as soon as gargaj does a few more phps, hopefully still this year, so as far as i see it, it doesnt really matter much if there are some extra categories or not right now.

also, i dont see processing as being just a java library with a new ide, even if it can be coded in eclipse. it has it's own language, quirks and limitations.

FEAR THE VOICE OF MUT HOPEDS

Ah. Categories.

Nerds really love them.

So, about the "no one handed in a icon yet.":


Ps: There goes my "procedural still graphics" icon proposition, it doesn't necessarily say 4k. Because I believe in the near future, that 4k will also expand to 8k or 32k and shrink to 1k aswell. So, this kind of an icon would be used next to a size-defining icon.

Umm, well and the idea behind it: Abstract, random colors give this "generated" feeling, and the colors of Rainbow (the colors are from Meher Baba's flag, an Indian spiritual teacher) look alive and harmonic enough whilst showing a somewhat random variety.

So can we now have our Procedural Graphics category? If the icon sucks I'm sorry, but at least I am trying.

I don't quite get why we should have categories for the tools used to create something. It's not like we have a DirectX category or anything. I think Processing-demos should just be listed in the "Java" category. Isn't that what it is?

decipher: added. thanks.

kusma: yes and no :D

ps: Care to elaborate? Last time I checked, Processing seemed to be a Java-framework for rapid prototyping. Anyrthing vital I missed?

kusma: for one, im also strong advocate for future directx/ogl and shader technology distinction in the categories. secondly i dont see processing as an ide/framework tool (the ide is actually quite disturbingly limited and annoying). but yes, in its core it is something running on top of java. and yet its an environment of its own. developing for that particular enviornment cannot quite be honestly comparable to developing for java on other ides/platforms. imho ofcourse.

ps, last year we had a Processing compo at Flashparty :) but anyway.. imo all processing prods should be in the java category
please read this comparison