[Closed] Just a replica

What do you mean?

several years ago i showed first time the principle – One tool, one script, one structure

now i see many tools are written this way

its a system where you define tool, it’s interface, callbacks, and macros all in one structure

Hehe… I hv tried many times.
I’m still at THAT level.
Hopefully one day.

can you show it again ?

If I remember correctly you use single structure and everything else is “inside” this structure – rollout, functions, etc.

I have this code of yours, saved on my PC.

 global GeneralSceneOps 
 (
 	struct GeneralSceneStruct
 	(
 		fn destroy = try(closeRolloutFloater GeneralSceneOps.dialog) catch(),
 		
 		title = "General Scene Helpers",
 		dialogWidth = 250,
 		dialogHeight = 400,
 		dialog,
 		
 		MatStruct =
 		(
 			struct MatStruct (material, slot)
 		),
 		ObjectRollout = rollout ObjectRollout "Objects"
 		(
 			local owner = if owner != undefined do owner
 			button deleteall_bt "Delete All Objects" align:#left width:(owner.dialogWidth - 30) offset:[-5,0] 
 			on deleteall_bt pressed do undo "Delete All" on
 			(
 				format ">>> %\n" owner
 				delete objects
 			)
 		),
 		materials = #(),
 		MaterialRollout = rollout MaterialRollout "Materials"
 		(
 			local owner = if owner != undefined do owner
 			button collectmats_bt "Collect Editor Materials" align:#left width:(owner.dialogWidth - 30) offset:[-5,0]
 			on collectmats_bt pressed do 
 			(
 				owner.materials = for k=1 to 24 collect (owner.MatStruct (medit.GetTopMtlSlot k) k)
 				format "mats: %\n" owner.materials
 			)
 		),
 		rollouts = #(ObjectRollout, MaterialRollout),
 		fn show = 
 		(
 			destroy()
 			dialog = newRolloutFloater title dialogWidth dialogHeight
			for r in rollouts do addRollout r dialog
		),
 		on create do
 		(
 			destroy()
 			rollouts.owner = this
 		)
 	)
 	GeneralSceneOps = GeneralSceneStruct()
 	ok
 )
 GeneralSceneOps.show()

Thanks! that’s a very good example

I categorized all of my scripts like this, But now I have a question. Do you think is it efficient to call a function from structure like this?
MyCompany.MyTools.MySkinTools.GetBones()

Yes. It’s absolutely safe and clear for code reading.
But we all know that ‘accessing’ a struct and struct members take a time and mxs memory allocation. So if you need to call some method frequently or repeatedly it’s better to store a pointer to the method first and you use later in a loop for example.

struct MyStruct
(
	fn call_method a b = (a*b)
)

(
	gc()
	d = MyStruct()
	
	t0 = timestamp()
	h0 = heapfree

	for k=1 to 100000 do
	(
		d.call_method 100 100
	)

	format "time:% heap:%\n" (timestamp() - t0) (h0 - heapfree)
)

(
	gc()
	d = MyStruct()
	
	t0 = timestamp()
	h0 = heapfree

	call_method = d.call_method
	
	for k=1 to 100000 do
	(
		call_method 100 100
	)

	format "time:% heap:%\n" (timestamp() - t0) (h0 - heapfree)
)

so, looking on the method name (GetBones) it’s ok to call it like MyCompany.MyTools.MySkinTools.GetBones()
because it’s a ‘once-used’ method (it doesn’t really effect performance and memory use)

but a function for example GetLocalVertexNormal which is expected to be used in a loop should be call as:

getLocalVertexNormal = MyCompany.MyTools.PolyMethods.GetLocalVertexNormal
<in loop>  getLocalVertexNormal ...