Re: scope, design patterns?
[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Date Index]
[
Thread Index]
- Subject: Re: scope, design patterns?
- From: Sean Conner <sean@...>
- Date: 2010年12月27日 15:50:32 -0500
It was thus said that the Great Patrick Mc(avery once stated:
>
> My newest project will probably be under 1K lines of code and would work
> with a poorly designed layout but I want to improve my habits. I do
> understand PIL/modules/upvalues quite well now but I am wondering if
> there are different strategies for managing much larger projects. I
> understand that lightroom is over 100k lines of Lua and there are other
> large applications too. Are there numerous design patterns out there to
> keep people from clobbering variables and organizing this much code? Do
> people usually just divide their code up into many modules? It seems
> that this is the main way privacy is achieved in let's say Python. Lua
> is a different tool and I want to learn the best way to use it
> irrespective of other languages.
Given that "require" and "module" add to the global namespace, I've been
creating modules (for my own use but some have been released) under a module
called "org.conman" (my domain reversed). That way, my "org.conman.dns"
(for a working example) does not conflict with any other "dns" module I may
have loaded. I also have "org.conman.table" (with a few useful functions
for tables), "org.conman.string" and "org.conman.debug". I don't think
anyone else has done that for Lua, but it *is* a popular pattern with Java
from what I understand.
Anyway, with that, I can do:
local dns = org.conman.dns
local debug = setmetatable(org.conman.debug , { __index = _G.debug })
local string = setmetatable(org.conman.string , { __index = _G.string })
and not have to worry about clashes.
-spc