[PD] libraries in Pd-extended 0.43

[Jamie Bullock]

On 14 Dec 2010, at 08:12, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:

> On 2010-12-14 05:58, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
> 
>> Pd doesn't really have classes like OOP (i.e. no inheritance), so I
> 
> as a matter of fact Pd implements a simple OOP system in C (including
> rudimentary inheritance).
> 
>> think it can be confusing to use that term.  
> 
> so i think that we should use the term
> 
>> People have been saying
>> objects for a long time with Pd and Max.
>> 
> 
> which doesn't make it any better.
> people have been saying "objects" for a long time in OOP, and you could
> use this very definition for Pd/Max like "objects" as well: it's the
> little rectangle things in your Pd-patch.
> 
> iirc, this has all been discussed to the end, and since then the term
> "objectclass" has been pretty much established for what matju refers to
> as "class" right now.

"objectclass" is a pleonasm and leads to: "an object is an instance of an objectclass", eugh!