[PD] libraries in Pd-extended 0.43

[Jamie Bullock]

On 14 Dec 2010, at 04:58, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:

> On Mon, 2010-12-13 at 20:25 -0800, Jonathan Wilkes wrote:
>> 
>> --- On Tue, 12/14/10, Mathieu Bouchard <matju at artengine.ca> wrote:
>> 
>>> From: Mathieu Bouchard <matju at artengine.ca>
>>> Subject: Re: [PD] libraries in Pd-extended 0.43
>>> To: "Jonathan Wilkes" <jancsika at yahoo.com>
>>> Cc: "PD List" <pd-list at iem.at>, "Hans-Christoph Steiner" <hans at at.or.at>
>>> Date: Tuesday, December 14, 2010, 3:04 AM
>>> On Mon, 13 Dec 2010, Jonathan Wilkes
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> As far as improving documentation, I'd say every
>>> object in Pd-ext should be
>>>> documented clearly in a help patch that outlines:
>>> 
>>> I'd say every class in Pd-ext should be
>>> documented clearly in a help patch that outlines:
>> 
>> You're right. I'm an object-o-phile.  But do you find "Related 
>> Objects" troubling-- should it be "Related Classes"?
> 
> Pd doesn't really have classes like OOP (i.e. no inheritance), so I
> think it can be confusing to use that term.  People have been saying
> objects for a long time with Pd and Max.

The concept of classes doesn't have anything to do with inheritance, it's about separating the abstract representation of something (class), and a concrete instance of that thing (object).

The terminology is used liberally in the Pd html manual http://www.crca.ucsd.edu/~msp/Pd_documentation/x2.htm and I think it's perfectly clear and not confusing at all. 

In fact it's more confusing to avoid the term class, since this then makes Pd inconsistent with other languages.

Jamie