General talk about software patterns

["Mike Beedle" <beedlem AT e-architects.com>]

RPG wrote:
> She equated the terms "object" and "pattern."

I am not surprised, specially when you consider that 
some self-proclaimed patterns experts in the software 
community, many with several "refereed articles", websites, 
and/or books to their names, equate patterns with:

        classes, objects, functions, code generation templates, 
        rules, system of rules and/or reusable components

Instead of equating them with **relationships** among these things.

In many cases, language syntax and/or features have sometimes 
published as "patterns".  Again, without any references to 
language syntax or language feature **relationships** to 
concrete software elements:  classes, objects, functions, 
templates (and/or macros), rules, system of rules components.

In her defense, she is probably a _visionary_ editor just 
for having seen something "special" in patterns,

- Mike