Re: scope, design patterns?

["Patrick Mc(avery" <spell_gooder_now@...>]

Sorry about the non-sense code I posted earlier, clearly I don't 
understand nested tables and/or how to define them local to their parent 
table and should have tested it before posting.

This code works and I don't actually want mainLoop.library1.z to return 
true.

local mainLoop = {}
mainLoop.library1 = {}
mainLoop.library2 = {}
mainLoop.library1.x = 1
mainLoop.library2.y = 2
mainLoop.library1.z = mainLoop.library2.y
print(mainLoop.library1.z)
-->2    --wish it returned nil

Sean Conner's code used Meta tables:
""
local dns    = org.conman.dns
local debug  = setmetatable(org.conman.debug  , { __index = _G.debug  })
local string = setmetatable(org.conman.string , { __index = _G.string })
"""

Is there a way to have nested tables that do not have access to each 
other? Is this why Sean needed to use meta tables?

Sean's strategy surely would work just fine but I tend to be shy of meta 
tables due to lack of experience.

Thanks for reading-Patrick



On 12/27/2010 06:09 PM, Patrick Mc(avery wrote:
> <blush>Whoa, I think I totally botched that example</blush>
>
> I'll be back....
>
>
>
> On 12/27/2010 05:52 PM, Patrick Mc(avery wrote:
> > Hi Sean
> >
> > Thanks for your response and thanks to Tomás, David and Steve too.
> >
> > If I understand this right could someone do this:
> > mainloop = {}
> > local mainLoop.library1 = {}
> > local mainLoop.library2 = {}
> > cont....
> >
> > Then would the "main loop"(for lack of better term) have access to the
> > library code but the library code would not have access to other
> > libraries?
> >
> > To split it up into a variety of files could one just use dofile() to
> > connect it all together?
> >
> > Could such a layout scale up into the 10's of thousands of lines of code?
> >
> > Thanks again-Patrick