Comments on: Processing, Ported to JavaScript http://createdigitalmotion.com/2008/05/09/processing-ported-to-javascript/ Motion graphics, live visuals, VJing, video production, and interactive art Thu, 20 Nov 2008 12:49:25 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.1 By: Create Digital Motion » Processing + iPhone, Via JavaScript, SpiderMonkey, OpenGL ES http://createdigitalmotion.com/2008/05/09/processing-ported-to-javascript/#comment-110628 Create Digital Motion » Processing + iPhone, Via JavaScript, SpiderMonkey, OpenGL ES Tue, 03 Jun 2008 15:39:11 +0000 http://createdigitalmotion.com/2008/05/09/processing-ported-to-javascript/#comment-110628 [...] my complaints about trying to run Processing in JavaScript in a browser, the recent port of Processing’s syntax to JavaScript has a lot of potential. Part of the underlying lesson here: platform-independence is cool. So where [...] [...] my complaints about trying to run Processing in JavaScript in a browser, the recent port of Processing’s syntax to JavaScript has a lot of potential. Part of the underlying lesson here: platform-independence is cool. So where [...]

]]> By: Create Digital Motion » Processing.js: Very Cool, But JavaScript Nuts Go Overboard http://createdigitalmotion.com/2008/05/09/processing-ported-to-javascript/#comment-105356 Create Digital Motion » Processing.js: Very Cool, But JavaScript Nuts Go Overboard Thu, 15 May 2008 21:09:29 +0000 http://createdigitalmotion.com/2008/05/09/processing-ported-to-javascript/#comment-105356 [...] projects are fantastic. I’m a believer in experiments and proof of concept. So when I saw the port of Processing to JavaScript, I was impressed. I think this stuff is valuable, even if it’s [...] [...] projects are fantastic. I’m a believer in experiments and proof of concept. So when I saw the port of Processing to JavaScript, I was impressed. I think this stuff is valuable, even if it’s [...]

]]> By: John Resig - Processing.js Aftermath http://createdigitalmotion.com/2008/05/09/processing-ported-to-javascript/#comment-104930 John Resig - Processing.js Aftermath Wed, 14 May 2008 06:07:46 +0000 http://createdigitalmotion.com/2008/05/09/processing-ported-to-javascript/#comment-104930 [...] Scott Hanselman, Kottke, Simon Willison, Peter Kirn, and [...] [...] Scott Hanselman, Kottke, Simon Willison, Peter Kirn, and [...]

]]> By: steve cooley http://createdigitalmotion.com/2008/05/09/processing-ported-to-javascript/#comment-104891 steve cooley Tue, 13 May 2008 20:38:15 +0000 http://createdigitalmotion.com/2008/05/09/processing-ported-to-javascript/#comment-104891 I don't know why my comment didn't go live on the author's original post, but the example graphic as seen here is either entirely by or extremely influenced by Jared Tarbell, http://complexification.net I don’t know why my comment didn’t go live on the author’s original post, but the example graphic as seen here is either entirely by or extremely influenced by Jared Tarbell, http://complexification.net

]]> By: Tatu Guerra http://createdigitalmotion.com/2008/05/09/processing-ported-to-javascript/#comment-104329 Tatu Guerra Sat, 10 May 2008 14:39:17 +0000 http://createdigitalmotion.com/2008/05/09/processing-ported-to-javascript/#comment-104329 Well, as I said before I'm ignorant at subject. Thx very much for the explanation Peter. I got the point. thx Well, as I said before I’m ignorant at subject. Thx very much for the explanation Peter. I got the point.

thx

]]> By: Peter Kirn http://createdigitalmotion.com/2008/05/09/processing-ported-to-javascript/#comment-104239 Peter Kirn Fri, 09 May 2008 19:40:46 +0000 http://createdigitalmotion.com/2008/05/09/processing-ported-to-javascript/#comment-104239 @Tatu: Nope, that won't work. Quartz Composer using JavaScript to script other events in QC -- and uses QC as the renderer. This implementation assumes you're using the *browser* as the renderer; that's the only reason you'd even want to use it. The browser is what's putting stuff on the screen. I should say it explicitly: there is a HUGE advantage to running Processing on Java as it was designed. All these additional libraries, all its performance features, its ability to do high-quality rendering, OpenGL -- all of this is dependent on Java as the platform. Compare Quartz Composer, which does only a few things, isn't extensible, is proprietary and closed-source (Java is open), and is chained to the Mac platform. @Tatu: Nope, that won’t work. Quartz Composer using JavaScript to script other events in QC — and uses QC as the renderer. This implementation assumes you’re using the *browser* as the renderer; that’s the only reason you’d even want to use it. The browser is what’s putting stuff on the screen.

I should say it explicitly: there is a HUGE advantage to running Processing on Java as it was designed. All these additional libraries, all its performance features, its ability to do high-quality rendering, OpenGL — all of this is dependent on Java as the platform.

Compare Quartz Composer, which does only a few things, isn’t extensible, is proprietary and closed-source (Java is open), and is chained to the Mac platform.

]]> By: Tatu Guerra http://createdigitalmotion.com/2008/05/09/processing-ported-to-javascript/#comment-104237 Tatu Guerra Fri, 09 May 2008 19:36:45 +0000 http://createdigitalmotion.com/2008/05/09/processing-ported-to-javascript/#comment-104237 I'm prety ignorant with programming. But I have a question about this subject. Wouldn't be useful JavaScript in Processing to connect Processing and QuartzComposer, once Qartz also work with JS? I’m prety ignorant with programming. But I have a question about this subject. Wouldn’t be useful JavaScript in Processing to connect Processing and QuartzComposer, once Qartz also work with JS?

]]>