It's still a common vocabulary. You're not rewriting the abstractions (or renaming them) every time.

And in your case why not just have the several different patches all be in the same folder with the abstractions?

-Jonathan

From: Mathieu Bouchard <matju@artengine.ca>;
To: Jonathan Wilkes <jancsika@yahoo.com>;
Cc: Morgan Packard <morgan@morganpackard.com>; Richie Cyngler <glitchpop@gmail.com>; pd list <pd-list@iem.at>;
Subject: Re: [PD] noob question: trying to repurpose the G08.reverb.pd example
Sent: Tue, Feb 15, 2011 5:03:13 PM

On Tue, 15 Feb 2011, Jonathan Wilkes wrote:

> Why not always put your abstractions in the same directory as the patch?  (Or in a
> subdirectory if you want to organize them that way.)  It makes things more modular:
> e.g., you can just compress the containing directory and shoot it off rather than
> sending a separate attachment for abstractions and have them copy your manually-entered
> search patch settings (which most likely will not be the same across platforms).

But sending a separate attachment also makes things more modular, as it allows using the exact same abstraction collection over several different patches. As those object-classes (abstractions) become more familiar, they become something that doesn't have to be relearned per-project and it becomes a common vocabulary across projects.

It's two different kinds of modularity.

_______________________________________________________________________
| Mathieu Bouchard ---- tél: +1.514.383.3801 ---- Villeray, Montréal, QC