On Tue, 3 Oct 2006 14:55:55 +0200 Frank Barknecht fbar@footils.org wrote:
I would agree that embedding abstractions can be useful, but where is making a subpatch out of an abstraction useful,
Just in the particular case where you want to consolidate everything into a single easy to share file.
make "wrapper abstractions": I don't change the abstraction itself, but put it inside another abstraction which adds some functionality:
[myabs]
then will become:
[inlet] | [pd do_something] | [myabs] | [pd do_something_more] | [outlet]
Great if your abstraction already exposes everything you might want to access.
But I *want* my subpatches to share the scope of the surrounding patch! ;)
Me too. Mostly. But sometimes I don't. :)
I love the analogy btw, so it's rather like I enjoy Pizza, but sometimes I like Kebab, Indian, or Chinese but I only have one phone number for Tony, Stavros, Sanjay and Chen labelled "food".
Let's see what we agree on....
Embedded abstractions inside a patch file.
Some kind of local (my $n) scoping for subpatches.
You know, on reflection this whole debate is best described as "encapsulation" and I've been looking at OSC/RRAD lately and thinking what a great system this is and should be more in the basic core of Pd. Perhaps a way to address a variable behind many layers of curtains as /foo/bar/$n or something?
best, a.