> > b) abstractions that finish with "_" are graphical abstractions. > > Sometimes, we create an abstraction without a gui, then we create a > > gui that wraps the same abstraction. The name of both abstractions > > will be the same, except that the second version will have a "_" > > appended. > > This sounds to me that you are exposing the implementation in the > interface. The interface should be defined separately from the > implementation, and definitely does not need to reflect it. When > using an object, it is a distraction to think about the > implementation of that object. Instead the programmer should be > thinking about the implementation of the program that is being > built. Therefore, the programmer would only need to know about the > interface.
I do not understand your comment, but here are more details on how this works: a pdmtl abstraction whose name ends with a "_" (or a "_~") is usually exactly the same abstraction as one that has the same name but does not end with a "_" (or "_~"). For the programmer, there is no difference between the inlets or outlets of both versions. The only difference is that in one version, the abstraction is a Graph On Parent that displays on screen controls, while the other does not. Usually when I am programming, I will use the nice and convenient "_" (GOP) version. But, since we all know Pd's graphic engine is real slow, when it is time to set up an installation or do a performance or when I generate the abstractions dynamically , I will switch the abstractions to the non GOP version WITHOUT hurting in any way the interconnection between all the objects. Also, since the "_" abstractions simply wrap their counterparts, they are both automatically updated if the "engine" is updated. Tom _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
