You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on Jan 6, 2021. It is now read-only.
I'm interested in further breaking up the components of Alda into separate processes, to make the system more modular. This would allow developers (myself included) to experiment with rewriting parts of Alda in other languages which might be better suited for what that component needs to do.
I'm interested in other developers' opinions about whether this is a good idea, possible pros and cons, etc. Please weigh in!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I've been doing a lot of planning and design for Alda 2.0, and I've decided to head in the opposite direction and do as much as possible in the Alda client, i.e. simplifying the architecture instead of making it more complicated.
As discussed in my blog post here: https://blog.djy.io/a-history-of-the-architecture-of-alda/
I'm interested in further breaking up the components of Alda into separate processes, to make the system more modular. This would allow developers (myself included) to experiment with rewriting parts of Alda in other languages which might be better suited for what that component needs to do.
I'm interested in other developers' opinions about whether this is a good idea, possible pros and cons, etc. Please weigh in!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: