On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 23:10:23 +0200 Rudolf Polzer wrote: > On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 10:20:12PM +0200, Francesco Poli wrote: > > On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 09:45:42 +0200 Rudolf Polzer wrote: > > [...] > > > Simply because the only part of the author that goes in is his thought, > > [...] > > > > It is indeed the author's thought that is goes in: something that is > > quite unique, I would say... > > Yes, but they are all transparently written down in the source code, in a form > anyone can (learn to) read. I am not sure what kind of program source code you are used to read, maybe you've just been lucky all the time... ;-) In my own personal experience, I've seen more than one case where, while reading the source code for a program, I wondered "what did the author mean to write here?" or "why did the author write this code like that?". This happens especially for poorly commented code or anyway for inelegant and complicated code. In summary, I don't agree that the author's thought is "transparently written down in the source code" of a program. At the very least, it's *not necessarily* written down. > Something that is simply impossible for many kinds > of music or other media. Music may be as obscure as some computer programs. Music may also be as clearly expressed as some other computer programs. I think you're overgeneralizing. > > > In summary, I think you are oversimplifying the art of programming. > > Not really. > > You can perfectly replicate a program by copying its source code. Indeed, but that is not the point. > > You cannot replicate the sound of spoken words by speaking the same words. I can replicate the sound of spoken words by copying its recording. But again, that is not the point. > > If you want to define source code as "whatever is needed for replicating the > output, in a form that can be edited", then spoken voice has no such thing. I have never defined source code like that. Source code is the preferred form for making modifications to the work. Make no mistake, it's *not* the preferred form for *recreating* the work from scratch: it's the preferred form for *making modifications* to it. If you want to *modify* the recording of spoken voice, some form of recording will surely be preferred over other formats. That is the source. I cannot be more specific, without discussing the details of a given practical case; and I am *not* willing to dive into the details of a practical example, since that would drive the discussion far away... -- http://www.inventati.org/frx/progs/scripts/pdebuild-hooks.html Need some pdebuild hook scripts? ..................................................... Francesco Poli . GnuPG key fpr == C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4
Attachment:
pgprklCtQzHtw.pgp
Description: PGP signature