“To define something is to stake a claim to its future, to make a claim about what it should be or become,” said David Ogborn.

Viewing live coding as a performance rather than merely a code display, defining it too strictly could limit its creative potential. Imposing rules or confining them within a strict definition might restrict the freedom and diversity coexisting in live coding. In the creative field, as projects take on different forms and styles, I believe that leaving “live coding” undefined allows for more possibilities to emerge and evolve in real-time, during live performances.

That said, my own interpretation of live coding is that it is a space where code is alive and constantly evolving. The code transformation can grow or end, and the performance can be a solo performance or an interactive experience with the audience. It is “alive” in the sense that it changes dynamically before the audience’s eyes, but it is also static in a way, like a painting, where the computer is the canvas, and each line of code is a brushstroke. This dual nature makes live coding an exciting side of art for both developers and audiences, shaping it into a unique live performance and an artistic experience.