Miller Puckette wrote:
I think the term 'external' was coined by David Zicarelli (in the context
of the M program, before Max) to mean an external code segment. I've always
used it to mean a calss defined in a dynamically linked object module
(presumably written in C).
I use the word 'abstractions' to refer to patches invoked by name in
object boxes. So for me at least, the two are different animals.
That has always been my understanding too (didn't know of the historical
background of course :) ... I have always though that:
externals = the ones made in C
abstractions = the ones in Pd
objects = the 'boxes' (as in Put->object vs message, numberbox etc.)
especially the vanilla ones (is [osc~] and object or an external?) ...
but also an umbrealla term for abstractions, externals,...
(Pd) application = a set of multiple abstractions and/or externals
which run in Pd and constitute a somewhat 'self-contained' applicetion
(like a sequencer, sampler etc.) often simply denoted by a cool/funky
name like "Super-duper-hyper-mega-wave-a-tronic sampler" etc.
Lorenzo
cheers
Miller
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 04:42:26AM +0000, Pedro Lopes wrote:
For me external is different from abstraction.
For what I understand there's a need for a joint concept, one that says
"this visual object box is<<something>>".
Is that what you call class Mathieu?
best,
Pedro
p.s.: this kinda answers another thread, where I posted that table of
concepts "mental exercise" (for me).
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 4:36 AM, Alexandre Porres<por...@gmail.com> wrote:
I didn't say they strictly are, but that they can be (as with list-abs).
alex
2011/2/16 Mathieu Bouchard<ma...@artengine.ca>
On Tue, 15 Feb 2011, Alexandre Porres wrote:
> Btw-- the manual makes a distinction between> "abstractions"
and "externs".
But it shouldn't, right? I mean, it's not real in practice, for
abstractions can be externals...
Which definitions are you using ?
I've never seen « abstractions are externals » nor anything that would
imply it.
I tried introducing the word « class » in users' vocabulary, to include
both abstraction definitions and external definitions under a same word, and
using the word « object » to mean instances of either, but there is still
some resistance to using industry-standard vocabulary instead of whatever
the MAX manuals coughed up, for example.
It would be good if you stated the definitions you use. It'd help me
understand how « abstractions are externals » can be a true statement.
_______________________________________________________________________
| Mathieu Bouchard ---- tél: +1.514.383.3801 ---- Villeray, Montréal, QC
_______________________________________________
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
--
Pedro Lopes (MSc)
contact: pedro.lo...@ist.utl.pt
website: http://web.ist.utl.pt/Pedro.Lopes /
http://pedrolopesresearch.wordpress.com/ | http://twitter.com/plopesresearch
_______________________________________________
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
_______________________________________________
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
_______________________________________________
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
