Re: return value of require?
[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Date Index]
[
Thread Index]
- Subject: Re: return value of require?
- From: Hakki Dogusan <dogusanh@...>
- Date: 2008年2月29日 10:21:35 +0200
Hi,
Petite Abeille wrote:
On Feb 28, 2008, at 9:18 AM, Hakki Dogusan wrote:
Can't comment on swig, but I'm using your style. In addition, I'm
writing my lua code as modules too (learned this style from Petite
Abeille's code):
Oh, my... :P
:)
I'm going to write ~70K line with this style.. Now, you know who'll call
you if something goes wrong ;)
Another advantage of using module() *without* package.seeall, is that it
forces you to declare/account for any external dependencies of a module.
Cut down on typo quiet a bit.
My reasoning of liking this style is as follows (excerpt from a message
sent to wxLua's list by me):
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Similar to x.cpp & x.h usage, I now have x.lua for a X class; clean
seperation/interface for public and private parts. Using __call method
as constructor made my modules very similar to cpp classes:
class X : public wxPanel {
public:
X(wxWindow* parent);
DoSomething() { DoPrivateThing(); }
private:
DoPrivateThing();
}
Became;
module"X"
local function DoPrivateThing(t) end
function __call(self, parent)
local o=wx.wxPanel(parent)
o.DoSomething=function(t) DoPrivateThing(t) end
return o
end
setmetatable(_M, _M)
Now both cpp and lua code looks similar:
cpp: o = X(p); o.DoSomething(); o.SetSize(..)
lua: o = X(p); o:DoSomething(); o:SetSize(..)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cheers,
PA.
--
Regards,
Hakki Dogusan