[squeak-dev] Re: Sound library (from Squeaking up for "'click' sound play")

Jerome Peace peace_the_dreamer at yahoo.com
Sun Apr 25 03:36:07 UTC 2010

Hi Hannes,

I was happy to answer your first request even though it was off the topic I was persuing. Now I must ask you to GTFI (Google the Fine Internet the modern equivalent of RTFM.)

You are asking me for information I don't have at my fingertips and which it would take me as much time to find out as it would you.

I like to be helpful but I must insist on putting my own work before your education. You are welcome and encouraged to do the opposite with your own efforts, not with mine.

>Hannes Hirzel hannes.hirzel at gmail.com
>Sat Apr 24 08:34:32 UTC 2010
>Hi Jerome
>Thanks for starting to work out a write-up how to deal with sound in Squeak 4.1.
>On 4/23/10, Jerome Peace <peace_the_dreamer at yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Hi Hannes.
>>>Hannes Hirzel hannes.hirzel at gmail.com
>>>Fri Apr 23 09:25:54 UTC 2010 :

Hannes>OK so may I consider SampledSound to be the sound library?

No. Look at the class to see the exact relationship.

>> Seymour Papert talks about bricolage. Spending time building with things
>> already on hand. Building in a playful spirit. The sound classes in squeak
>> are amazing toys to play with. Beyond the sounds in the SampledSound sound
>> library you can play a great number of things. I've just started to notice
>> its capabilities.
>This is interesting. Do you have a reference?

Google the first sentence:
>Yes, we need a good way to access sounds. That means 'code idioms'
>which are easy to grasp for a beginner to use sounds.

Squeak in its spirit is about making language. Language is about communicating with strangers until they are not strange anymore. The best way to aid that is to use language the stranger already knows.

>(Or in SW engineering terms - an embedded DSL for handling sounds)
Acronyms and abbreviations are strange to me. What are you meaning when you say SW and DSL?

>It would help to have a couple of good example statements what can be
>done with sound as of now.
>Did you check out the Squeak wiki? I found an entry
>Squeak sound architecture
>I did not go through it.

Why not? (I'm curious. What made it uninviting?) 

>We need to know what still works or how things are done these days.
Huh? What stops you from knowing how things will work in the future? There is no reason documentation can't precede design. Indeed that's the way most things will happen. 

If things are done in a clumsy way now, then it will be a bear to document. If something that doesn't exist has beautiful documentation it will be brought into existence.

>This could then be an entry in the 'Help' menu called 'Sound' which
>contains code snippets and instructions how to deal with sound.
>> A journey sometimes starts with only a notion of a destination or even just
>> a need to leave the present location. The path unfolds as one goes. 
>> Always, a journey starts with a first step.
>I agree. And you did that step.
>> Yours in curiosity and service, --Jerome Peace
>In your service as well
>P.S. The  class AbstractSound  and the subclasses - do they contains
>useful comments?

Umm. You tell me.

Cheers --Jer


More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list