Gammon Forum : Programming : General : Local variables in a required module

Log on

Gammon Forum

Entire forum

Programming

General

Local variables in a required module

Local variables in a required module

It is now over 60 days since the last post. This thread is closed. Refresh page

Posted by

Seriley (42 posts)

bio

Date

Tue 07 Sep 2010 02:06 AM (UTC)

Amended on Tue 07 Sep 2010 02:07 AM (UTC) by Seriley

Message

If a local variable is declared in a module, outside of any block, and a script requires this module, then
1) The scope of the local variable in the module is the entire module
2) The scope of this variable does not expand to include a script that requires this module

Is this assumption correct?

The language is lua

top

Posted by

Twisol USA (2,257 posts)

bio

Date

Reply #1 on Tue 07 Sep 2010 02:55 AM (UTC)

Message

Yes, that's right. When a Lua script is loaded, it's as though you did loadstring("file contents") and called the result. As loadstring() return a function, locals defined within the file "chunk" remain completely local to that chunk.

Likewise, because the function is constructed by loadstring() and not defined inline, locals you define before loading the file are not visible to the loaded chunk.

'Soludra' on Achaea

Blog: http://jonathan.com/
GitHub: http://github.com/Twisol

top

Posted by

Worstje Netherlands (899 posts)

bio

Date

Reply #2 on Tue 07 Sep 2010 02:56 AM (UTC)

Message

I am kinda sleepy, so disclaimers apply to the following statements.

Yes, that is correct. You can of course easily check this stuff for yourself.

A good way to think of require (and in extension module(...)s too, altho some more magic happens there), is as a fancy dofile() that craps out big time when the file is missing or has errors. Now, dofile() is basically compiling the script into a block in its own context (a 'block', or anonymous function of sorts if you prefer), which is then executed.

Thus, long story short... think of any file you require as a function you call. While fancy stuff with regards to globals do happen, local variables live only in said execution of said function, making it impossible for outside sources to tamper with that particular local variable.

(If I was awake enough, I'd probably delete all the above and rewrite it, but make of it what you want to, and Lua fanatics, feel free to correct me where I am incorrect.)

top

Posted by Nick Gammon Australia (22,975 posts) bio Forum Administrator

Date

Reply #3 on Tue 07 Sep 2010 03:01 AM (UTC)

Amended on Tue 07 Sep 2010 03:19 AM (UTC) by Nick Gammon

Message

Seriley said:

1) The scope of the local variable in the module is the entire module

Not quite. The scope of the local variable is from the definition downwards.

For example:


print (a)  --> nil
local a = 42

That may seem pedantic, but the scope is not the entire module.

Also consider this:


do
  local x = 99
  print (x)  --> 99
end

print (x)  --> nil

The local variable's scope is actually just downwards from its declaration in the enclosing block, in this case the do ... end block.

Remove the word "local" in that example and both times 99 is printed.

And this:


function f ()
  print (z)
end -- f

local z = 22

f ()  --> nil

In this example I have set up z (assigned the value 22 to it) before trying to use it in function f. However f does not recognise z as it was declared after it (f) was. So it prints nil.

Again, removing local would let z print as 22.

- Nick Gammon

www.gammon.com.au, www.mushclient.com

top

Posted by Nick Gammon Australia (22,975 posts) bio Forum Administrator

Date Reply #4 on Tue 07 Sep 2010 03:17 AM (UTC)

Message

Seriley said:

2) The scope of this variable does not expand to include a script that requires this module

That bit is right. The idea of using "local" in modules is to isolate their effect from the rest of your scripts.

Another thing to look at is the module function. This sets up a special environment for your module so that even non-global variables are protected from being accessed in global namespace of the script that requires it. Except, as a sub-variable of the module itself.

Also it protects the caller global namespace from access unless you take extra steps. So if there is a global variable "foo" in your calling script, the module cannot affect it.

So basically using the module function protects you from the module corrupting the main program, and vice-versa.

As an example, look at copytable.lua that comes with MUSHclient.

Now if you load that, and try to access the non-local function "deep" you cannot do so directly:


require "copytable"
print (deep)  --> nil

However you can get it as a sub-item of copytable itself, eg.


require "copytable"
print (copytable.deep)  --> function: 018942E8

- Nick Gammon

www.gammon.com.au, www.mushclient.com

top

Posted by

Seriley (42 posts)

bio

Date

Reply #5 on Tue 07 Sep 2010 06:24 PM (UTC)

Message

Thanks to all for your responses. I had done a quick and dirty test before posting my original question, but sometimes my tests miss edge cases (as was pointed out here).

This forum is a great place to learn!

top

The dates and times for posts above are shown in Universal Co-ordinated Time (UTC).

To show them in your local time you can join the forum, and then set the 'time correction' field in your profile to the number of hours difference between your location and UTC time.

18,762 views.

It is now over 60 days since the last post. This thread is closed. Refresh page

Go to topic: Search the forum

top

Quick links: MUSHclient. MUSHclient help. Forum shortcuts. Posting templates. Lua modules. Lua documentation.

Information and images on this site are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Australia License unless stated otherwise.