On Fri, 2008-01-11 at 19:01 -0500, marius schebella wrote:
ok, then it was a misunderstanding, I am also not saying that is has to be in the core of pd. (is there an official policy that objectclasses which can be created as abstractions should not be included as c objectclass?...)
i don't know, but to me it seems, that miller follows such kind of a policy. you will hardly find any built-in classes, that could be easily substituted by abstractions made of other classes and if so, they are there because of historical reasons (is that correct?)
but now, when I think about this... why is there now pd-featured abstraction list?
yeah, why? i think that would be a nice thing to have.
counter would be an object that should be included in "standard abstractions folder".
i think the problem is to find a universal counter object. i usually find it easier to quickly hack a counter for the special task i need it for than figuring out if a certain existing counter class fits my needs (to realize afterwards, that it isn't exactly what i was looking for).
or is everybody supposed to create his own version of useful abstractions over and over again?
no, you create it once and you can reuse it over and over again.
btw: it's exactly to goal of pdmtl-abs to collect abstractions, that could be of general use. if you miss a counter class with a certain behaviour, please feel free to add it (or ask someone to implement it for you).
roman
Telefonate ohne weitere Kosten vom PC zum PC: http://messenger.yahoo.de