[PD-dev] "object" lib

[Hans-Christoph Steiner]

On Apr 8, 2006, at 12:12 AM, carmen wrote:

>> At the level of patching, inheritance can be partially replaced by  
>> deeply
>> nested abstractions and a lot of [route]s, though those who'd like to
>> implement mixins are screwed. How would you emulate virtual  
>> inheritance
>> with abstractions and [route] ?
>
> inside a patch needing a few additional methods (assuming it has a  
> single inlet), i'd just wire in any number of abstractions in  
> series. inside those abstractions would be a route, for the methods  
> which the mixin abstractions implement.. i havent actually tried  
> this. im fairly sure i would consider my OSC/message recording  
> things a mixin as well, simply create one in a subpatch, and you  
> have a local send/recieve variable which can forward arbitrary  
> messages to the global 'recording agent'..similar to AOP logging..
>
> in any case there are definitely OO concepts at play, in a world  
> where structs-within-structs or creative $0 tricks are as close as  
> one can currently go.
>
> Hans, if youre stilll reading, how does 'meta' sound? i do like the  
> idea of collecting all these dynamic patching things in one place..

Part of PDDP is standard meta information, so a "meta" lib should  
probably handle that stuff.  I still think that "object" in the  
context of Pd makes good sense since it's a collection of objects  
used for writing objects.

(I deliberatly say "object" and not "class", since "class" implies a  
lot of OOP concepts which are not in Pd, like subclass/superclass,  
class tree/hierarchy, inheritance, etc.).

.hc


________________________________________________________________________ 
____

"[W]e have invented the technology to eliminate scarcity, but we are  
deliberately throwing it away to benefit those who profit from  
scarcity."
                                                      -John Gilmore