On Tue, 14 Dec 2010, 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).
This rudimentary inheritance, I suppose, is a way of looking at the way the C structs are nested : t_pd is in t_gobj, t_gobj is in t_object, t_object is in t_iemgui, t_iemgui is in t_bng, ... However, Pd doesn't implement any inheritance of methods, so I wouldn't say that it supports inheritance. I found this to not be an obstacle to calling Pd an OOP language (see my reply to Hans).
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.
Either "object class" (or "objectclass") or "class" can do, as long as "object" is synonymous with "instance", and there's a separate word meaning "class" in one way or another.
"objectclass" was proposed as a compromise to be more readily accepted by current pd users, but in the end, even the shorthand "class" ought to be understood by everybody.
| Mathieu Bouchard ---- tél: +1.514.383.3801 ---- Villeray, Montréal, QC