How useful is the "Processing" Programming language? Is it a waste of time?

Question

The language site: http://processing.org/

Does anyone use this language for anything useful? I have the opportunity to learn this in a classroom setting and am wondering if it will be a waste of time.

Answer 1

Anything that beautiful could never be a waste of time. :) It's probably the leading tool in its space, which would be something like, "Declarative languages for visualizing data". (Though I'm told it can do more than that.) Its got a O'Reilly book - that's always a great sign.

Answer 2

'Useful' and 'Beautiful' do not describe the library (processing is not a language), but the programs written in it. They are usually beautiful, but can be useful, too. Perhaps browsing it's showcase can give you a hint about some useful programs. Processing is very well suited for visualization apps, so it can indeed be useful for that.

Now, that's for the usefulness of the applications. For the usefulness of programming them, I think it's a pretty cool way to show more visually how some fundamental concepts of programs work, which you may find enjoyable. Processing is being used a lot nowadays to teach fundamentals of programming; it'd be cool to learn recursion by making fractals.

Answer 3

Yes, it is useful and not a waste of time. I'm using Processing mainly for building proof-of-concepts for visualisations and graphic experiments. The time between an idea in my head and working code on my laptop is small, mainly because Processing does not throw too many obstacles in that course.

The ease of experimenting with things in Processing is an advantage in learning to program. Processing is actually a front-end to Java programs. At run-time the Processing code is translated to Java code.

Processing comes with a small but capable development environment (IDE), excellent documentation, a large library of extensions and a significant set of examples and demos.

Finally, I strongly recommend the book Processing: A Programming Handbook for Visual Designers and Artists by Casey Reas and Ben Fry, the authors of Processing. It's a beautiful book, carefully edited and full of sources for inspiration.

Answer 4

Processing has been used for hundreds of high-end projects in a wide range of fields, from multimedia installations to information visualization. It is not a toy or an educational exercise, despite its roots as a teaching tool.

The core application framework simplifies most common multimedia needs (OpenGL, Quicktime, PDF export, camera capture), removing project overhead involved in the boring task of setting up basic applications.It uses an extensible code structure that has allowed the creation of dozens of useful libraries for everything from 3D import / export to complex geometry synthesis.

So no, it is not a waste of time.

A references from my own work:

• Stockspace

Answer 5

I spent 2 hours looking at the processing docs with no previous experience and popped out a cool html5 canvas animation (check it out here: sfgeo.dyndns.org/data/contrib/efishpjs/ ) that would have taken ages even in my most familiar languages. I think "waste of time" is likelier to describe neglecting a superb programming environment because it has a whiff of a designer tool. Also, processing.js is awesomeness with a 5 x 10^200 horsepower jetpack.

Answer 6

I have used processing for many interactive installations and found it really useful, because you get real fast results. Programming visual effects is really easy and elegant. Some examples to watch:

• http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ziv8Q5N7mSU
• http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrT5uJox0J0
• http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y58wBAp7mac
• http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EZp5HsFKxCs
• http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d4LcfsHQnYw

If you are dealing with a lot of data (many bitmaps, videos and sound) you might consider its limitations. I was happy to use it and will continue using it for certain projects.

So as a conclusion: processing is no waste of time. It's a really useful language for real world applications (in its own domain of course).