[PD] Abstraction [define]

[Cesare Marilungo]

Frank Barknecht wrote:
> Hallo,
> Cesare Marilungo hat gesagt: // Cesare Marilungo wrote:
>
>   
>> No. Because the state is saved in the patch which use the abstraction. 
>>     
>
> But which state should be saved if you edit an abstraction itself?
>
> Ciao
>   
You mean if you open it from inside a patch which use the abstraction? 
Well... uhm... :-[

I'm tempted to answer that if you open an abstraction, and you modify it 
(even adding object and repatching other objects) you need to save the 
abstraction for the main patch to acknowledge it as it has been changed. 
You're saving the state of the abstraction itself. But for me an 
abstraction is like a function in a library. I don't need to edit it in 
everyday use. To me it should be like a built-in object. If I need to 
abstract a part of a patch on-the-fly there's the subpatch thing.

Anyway, I'm not proposing to change how Pd behaves. At least for me, 
there's nothing more we need in this area. I don't even feel the need to 
have presets since for me the patch itself is the preset. Presets are 
useful if you want to distribute something like a soft synth or any 
other instrument or effect that mimics some hardware counterpart. And 
you know better than me that we already have the tools to do this.

So what was Miller thinking about when he mentioned this general 
state-saving mechanism? And how come you don't use the 'init' 
functionalty of gui objects? For me it is so useful.

c.

-- 
http://www.cesaremarilungo.com