Extension Question

[Trenloe]

The other thing to keep in mind with replacing global package functions is that they run outside of the global package. So if the base package has a number of non-public package variables defined as "local" in the package LUA file outside of functions, the replaced function won't have access to these. Thus meaning that it's not always possible to replace an individual function in a global package, as these local package variables can't be accessed without changing the base package, which defeats he objects of overriding package functions. So keep this in mind when looking at overriding a global package function.

[Bidmaron]

Man, this has engendered some great discussions. All great things to think about, and when Dulux makes his video, he will have another excuse for a shameless plug.

[Bidmaron]

Perhaps packages should have a standard set of get... set... functions to provide overriders access to package locals (or at least the ones that have a conceivable usage by overriders).

[Trenloe]

Perhaps packages should have a standard set of get... set... functions to provide overriders access to package locals (or at least the ones that have a conceivable usage by overriders).

If the developer thought they'd need to do this then they could just remove the "local" from the variable definition to make it available outside of the package.

[Bidmaron]

True, Trenloe, but one of the precepts of object-oriented programming, which we are trying to emulate here is that data is encapsulated where manipulated, and, for those who are believers in this programming concept (and I'm not sure I'm really there yet, but I'm starting to come around), the get... set... is more pure to the concept (and lessens possibility of name collisions when people attempt to use the same name out of ignorance of the name's existence somewhere else).

[Trenloe]

True, Trenloe, but one of the precepts of object-oriented programming, which we are trying to emulate here is that data is encapsulated where manipulated, and, for those who are believers in this programming concept (and I'm not sure I'm really there yet, but I'm starting to come around), the get... set... is more pure to the concept (and lessens possibility of name collisions when people attempt to use the same name out of ignorance of the name's existence somewhere else).

I don't think there is any specific programming methodology being adhered to 100% by anyone here. Nor is one (OOP, FOP, RAD, etc.) being touted over the other. I do not subscribe to your suggestion that developers should be made to do a lot more coding to try to fit to a concept that the majority of community developers on this forum would never adhere to. Are you seriously suggesting that developers should go to the hassle of creating get/set functions for each local variable just in case someone might want to access a local variable - purely as a good-practice-programming-concept?

[Bidmaron]

Well, when you put it that way....

[dulux-oz]

You realize now that you have to figure out the best way to do this and make a tutorial video for the rest of us.

It's actually in pre-production

[dulux-oz]

I don't think there is any specific programming methodology being adhered to 100% by anyone here. Nor is one (OOP, FOP, RAD, etc.) being touted over the other. I do not subscribe to your suggestion that developers should be made to do a lot more coding to try to fit to a concept that the majority of community developers on this forum would never adhere to. Are you seriously suggesting that developers should go to the hassle of creating get/set functions for each local variable just in case someone might want to access a local variable - purely as a good-practice-programming-concept?

Actually, I tend to try to code as OOP & RAD, and there is something to be said about having some "coding standards" in place that everyone "should" follow - I'm thinking about the various Linux-coding standards that most distros follow and which the Linux-coding community generally adhere too - because having a "framework" of standards (even informal ones) and encouraging people to use that framework helps everybody - but I can also see Trenloe's point in that getting coders to do anything the same way as each other is like herding cats, and getting Community/volunteer coders to do it is like herding saber-toothed tigers!

Still, it might be worth considering and having a discussion about this between the Devs and Community Devs - if we can get the majority of the tigers to at least walk in the same general direction then we'll start to see the benefits of doing so sooner rather than later - just like the Linux-coders have and just like a plethora of other Open Source and Community-driven/supported projects have.

Just a thought

Cheers