[PD] Abstractions x Externals

[Alexandre Porres]

I see.

I was thinking of externals as anything that can be loaded as an object or
library - like any non native/pd vanilla object - at startup.

Therefore, my concept of externals is broad, and can include abstractions if
their path is listed on Pd preferences.

I don't use vanilla, so I don't know if the [sin~] object or list-abs is
loaded there. But then, what matters is that I am actually wrong to conceive
it this way, and need to be corrected, right?

The thing is that I am translation my long Pd Tutorial to english, and I
make this assumption there somewhere. One of my intent to translate to
english is to see if you guys find inconsistent information there too.

Thanks a lot
Alex



2011/2/16 Miller Puckette <msp at ucsd.edu>

> I think the term 'external' was coined by David Zicarelli (in the context
> of the M program, before Max) to mean an external code segment.  I've
> always
> used it to mean a calss defined in a dynamically linked object module
> (presumably written in C).
>
> I use the word 'abstractions' to refer to patches invoked by name in
> object boxes.  So for me at least, the two are different animals.
>
> cheers
> Miller
>
> On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 04:42:26AM +0000, Pedro Lopes wrote:
> > For me external is different from abstraction.
> > For what I understand there's a need for a joint concept, one that says
> > "this visual object box is <<something>>".
> >
> > Is that what you call class Mathieu?
> >
> > best,
> > Pedro
> > p.s.: this kinda answers another thread, where I posted that table of
> > concepts "mental exercise" (for me).
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 4:36 AM, Alexandre Porres <porres at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > I didn't say they strictly are, but that they can be (as with
> list-abs).
> > >
> > > alex
> > >
> > > 2011/2/16 Mathieu Bouchard <matju at artengine.ca>
> > >
> > > On Tue, 15 Feb 2011, Alexandre Porres wrote:
> > >>
> > >>  > Btw-- the manual makes a distinction between> "abstractions"
> > >>> and "externs".
> > >>>
> > >>> But it shouldn't, right? I mean, it's not real in practice, for
> > >>> abstractions can be externals...
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >> Which definitions are you using ?
> > >>
> > >> I've never seen « abstractions are externals » nor anything that would
> > >> imply it.
> > >>
> > >> I tried introducing the word « class » in users' vocabulary, to
> include
> > >> both abstraction definitions and external definitions under a same
> word, and
> > >> using the word « object » to mean instances of either, but there is
> still
> > >> some resistance to using industry-standard vocabulary instead of
> whatever
> > >> the MAX manuals coughed up, for example.
> > >>
> > >> It would be good if you stated the definitions you use. It'd help me
> > >> understand how « abstractions are externals » can be a true statement.
> > >>
> > >>
>  _______________________________________________________________________
> > >> | Mathieu Bouchard ---- tél: +1.514.383.3801 ---- Villeray, Montréal,
> QC
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Pd-list at iem.at mailing list
> > > UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
> > > http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Pedro Lopes (MSc)
> > contact: pedro.lopes at ist.utl.pt
> > website: http://web.ist.utl.pt/Pedro.Lopes /
> > http://pedrolopesresearch.wordpress.com/ |
> http://twitter.com/plopesresearch
>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Pd-list at iem.at mailing list
> > UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-list/attachments/20110216/6c627290/attachment.htm>