[PD] "object" or "class" in pdpedia

[Thomas Grill]

Hi Frank,
it's my turn now to absolutely second what you said.

gr~~~

Am 13.09.2007 um 15:32 schrieb Frank Barknecht:

> Hallo,
> Frank Barknecht hat gesagt: // Frank Barknecht wrote:
>
>> This is a "me too"-message from me: For the same reasons as Thomas  
>> I'd
>> prefer to stick with "object". While "class" is more correct, I think
>> the difference is something only computer scientists are interested
>> in and Pd has a tradition of not always following the path of
>> mainstream computer science anyway, because it's not a tool mainly
>> targetting computer scientists but one targetting artists. I'd say,,
>> reserve the term class for pd-dev.
>
> It occured to me that it may sound like I'd try to "dumb down" Pd for
> artists, which is not my intention, so I'd like to clarify a bit:
>
> We're talking about what term to use in pdpedia for the descriptions
> of the available building blocks for patches, mainly externals and
> abstractions. When building patches, what users (scientists and
> artists) deal with, are objects. The only thing you can do with a
> class when building a patch is to make an instance of it: an object of
> the class.
>
> So in the pdpedia context using the term "object" for the list of
> building blocks in my view wouldn't be wrong at all. As "object" also
> is the term that is generally used when talking about Pd patches
> here--as in: "Just put an [osc~] object into your patch to make a sine
> wave." Nobody says: "Instantiate the [osc~] class to make a sine
> wave."--it is perfectly valid to use "object/symbol" on pdpedia. IMO
> at least.
>
> Ciao
> -- 
>  Frank Barknecht                 _ ______footils.org_ __goto10.org__
>
> _______________________________________________
> PD-list at iem.at mailing list
> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/ 
> listinfo/pd-list
>