On Tue, 25 Apr 2006, David Powers wrote:
How can one do object-oriented PD (there are at least some parallels), and how might that differ from other approaches?
First you have to avoid those who say that PD is only for music and/or video; they can't put the word "application" or "program" on a patch or a set of patches, it has to be called "patches".
Second you have to avoid those who say PD isn't object-oriented and especially those who think that you should not use anything that "looks" too object-oriented because it wouldn't fit the "dataflow paradigm", whatever that is.
Third is a rule for OOP in general, in any language: the final goal is never to make a program "more OOP", it's to make a program better, by any "paradigm" necessary.
What are typical problems that one can expect to encounter, including problems relating to different platforms and limitations of PD, and what are good strategies to overcome these limitations?
heeee... getting abstraction arguments to work exactly like external arguments? Sometimes things are easier in C than in Pd (and that's sad).
But that's a very wide question and the answers you'll get will never paint a complete picture, no matter which programming language it is being asked about, even though I think that Pd has more holes than almost all programming languages.
_ _ __ ___ _____ ________ _____________ _____________________ ... | Mathieu Bouchard - tél:+1.514.383.3801 - http://artengine.ca/matju | Freelance Digital Arts Engineer, Montréal QC Canada