Dynamic Component DCFunctionsV1 within in Module

TIG · 20 Mar 2017, 11:05

Yes you should keep your own code within your own modules.

The example I gave is adding methods into SketchUp's DCFunctionsV1 class directly.
I did that to show how to construct the new method etc...

You could do it within your module with suitable extends etc:
http://sketchucation.com/forums/search.php?keywords=extend+class%26amp;fid%5B0%5D=180
with refine:
http://sketchucation.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=573770#p573770
etc
BUT I'm unsure that DCFunctionsV1 will respect those added methods outside of your code - i.e. with DC code...
Test it and see...
DCFunctionsV1.instance_methods.sort

michaelwhksg · 25 Mar 2017, 22:52

Hi TIG, I have been trying for a few days with DCFunctionsV1.instance_methods.sort.

However, it does not really work.

Are you able to help enlighten me further?

TIG · 27 Mar 2017, 14:01

Using
DCFunctionsV1.instance_methods.sort
in the Ruby Console simply returns a list of all of the methods available.
If you have added your own method it will also be listed there.

The example I gave for adding ' atan2' will work if you then used it as directed in your DC code...

TIG · 28 Mar 2017, 10:08

You have misunderstood the purpose of the ...methods.sort snippet.
It is for use in the Ruby Console - pasted manually - so that you can see what's available.
The main code that defines the new function should NOT have that added into it !
As you have found it breaks it !

You have a script creating the atan2 function.
Do not do anything more to that.
Do not place it within your own name spaces [for now at least].
Use it as my example...
Use it to add the extra function directly into the DC code.

In the DC you then use: =atan2(y,x)
as the function...

michaelwhksg · 29 Mar 2017, 05:56

Understood your message, TIG.

Does this mean that at this point in time, we are unable to introduce a new function in our name spaces?

TIG · 29 Mar 2017, 12:17

There are ways to use an existing class and add to it or 'refine' it etc within your own module[s].
But that will provide the new class/method when called within your module - but not outside of it.

Since the DC code is calling its class/method directly, then your own method-wrapped additions will not be seen by it.

Since you are only using this code for yourself [?] I see little wrong in adding directly to the DC class and then making your own separate code within your own module[s] to do other things.
The method I provided only adds the new method it it doesn't exist [for example some other code is adding it or in the future it's added to the main shipped class.

It is bad form to mess with shipped classes etc, but sometimes you must do it - e.g. this DC class methods are used directly in the DC functions...

michaelwhksg · 29 Mar 2017, 22:56

Thanks for the advice, TIG. Appreciate your input.

At this moment, I am using the code for myself. However, I am also looking at opportunity to release the dynamic components I have created into the Extension Store.

I have seen the recommendation that you have shared with others in the forum. One way of getting the DC component to be dependent on the plugin is to give the DC component a function defined in the code. The DC component will not work without the plugin.

How can we use the class DCFunctionV1 within the name space (our own module) so that it fulfills the requirement of a good practice of a plugin? This is the question I am trying to get around. Any recommendation on this?

TIG · 30 Mar 2017, 10:44

I don't think you can do it wrapped inside your module.
It needs to add the function-method to the DC class directly, so that it's then seen by the DC function calling that class.
If you define it within your module it's your module's class and will not be seen.
Even if you 'refine' it or use it in other ways it's new methods are only seen in your class.
You need to change the DC class directly !

Changing a shipped class might get you into a mess on the EWH.
You could of course sell it separately...

TIG · 1 Apr 2017, 13:03

Can you please format your code using the 'code' tags and indent it.
It's very hard to read as it is...

Your example is still changing the shipped class, so it will probably fail EWH checking...
You can but submit it, and wait and see.

You do not need the convolutions you added - they do nothing to a DC and still change the shipped class.

I can see no way you can do this and distribute it via the EWH, unless they agree to your class additions which technically break their strict rules...

michaelwhksg · 3 Apr 2017, 02:57

Hi TIG. Sorry, will use the "code" tags in future.

Will try to submit once I have cleaned up the code.
Fingers crossed, but I have a feeling that you are right. It might get rejected.

It will be a pity though, because I believe there are many members who are able to build up the dynamic components (which can speed up and simplify the entire modelling process), but there's no way to prevent the DC from being distributed without the authors' agreement.

Dan Rathbun · 4 Apr 2017, 00:04

@michaelwhksg said:

Hi TIG. Sorry, will use the "code" tags in future.

(1) A better idea is to edit your previous post, and insert the code tags.

(2) The example is STILL wrong in that the check for method definition still uses the name atan2.

(3) Yes, please use a unique method name, as your implementation of the atan2 method (specifically the parameter list) is not how the rest of the world would define it for use by ALL coders.

michaelwhksg · 4 Apr 2017, 06:31

If i am using the code which you have shared, and keying DCFunctionsV1.instance_methods.sort in the Ruby Console, I do see atan2 appearing in the console.

However, if I tried inserting the DCFunctionsV1.instance_methods.sort into the code, an error message appeared.

Below is the code which I have tried...

# add_funcs.rb
# extends DCs functions
require('sketchup')

module ABC
module ABC123

if Sketchup.version.to_i <= 8
  require('dynamiccomponents.rb')
else
  require('su_dynamiccomponents.rb')
end
if defined?($dc_observers)
  # Open SketchUp's Dynamic Component Functions (V1) class.
  # only if DC extension is active
  class DCFunctionsV1.instance_methods.sort #(did I do this correctly?)
    protected
    unless DCFunctionsV1.method_defined?(;atan2)
      # access to Ruby's arctangent method
      # Usage; =atan2(y,x)
      def atan2(a)
        return Math;;atan2(a[0],a[1]).radians
      end
    end#unless
    protected;atan2
  end#class
end#if

end #module ABC123
end #module ABC

This generated an error message.

"Error Loading File arctan-test2.rb
Error: #<SyntaxError: C:/Users/wongh/AppData/Roaming/SketchUp/SketchUp 2017/SketchUp/Plugins/arctan-test2.rb:16: syntax error, unexpected '\n', expecting :: or '[' or '.'
C:/Users/wongh/AppData/Roaming/SketchUp/SketchUp 2017/SketchUp/Plugins/arctan-test2.rb:30: syntax error, unexpected keyword_end, expecting end-of-input
end #module ABC
^>"

Is there anything I have done wrongly?

arctan-test2.rb

arctan-test.skp

michaelwhksg · 4 Apr 2017, 06:44

Since we are unable to wrap the class DCFunctionsV1 in the name space, if we just submit the script with 2 parts, one of which is the DCFunctionsV1 and letting the formula be defined as my own unique name, and the second part which is wrapped within my name space, will this work? Will EWH team accept this?

For example,...

# add_funcs.rb
# extends DCs functions
require('sketchup')
if Sketchup.version.to_i <= 8
  require('dynamiccomponents.rb')
else
  require('su_dynamiccomponents.rb')
end
if defined?($dc_observers)
  # Open SketchUp's Dynamic Component Functions (V1) class.
  # only if DC extension is active
  class DCFunctionsV1
    protected
    unless DCFunctionsV1.method_defined?(;XXXXXX)
      # access to Ruby's arctangent method
      # Usage; =ABC123
      def (we give this definition a unique name)
        return XXXXXX (my own unique formula)
      end
    end#unless
    protected;ABC123
  end#class
end#if

module ABC
module ABC123

codes to be in the name space

end #ABC123
end #ABC

michaelwhksg · 5 Apr 2017, 05:33

Hi Dan,
Thanks for the feedback.

Have already edited the previous posts with the code tags.
Have changed the example slightly (removal of the name atan2).
Will use my unique name for the formula in the DCFunctionsV1 class.

Will try to submit the extension after I clean up my code.
Thanks.

michaelwhksg · 5 May 2017, 23:52

Hi TIG, Dan,
Is there any resources online that shows how we can input the licensing code to our script? The below web link automatically directed me to another webpage instead of the licensing tutorial.

http://www.sketchup.com/intl/en/developer/docs/tutorial_licensing

Dan Rathbun · 15 May 2017, 19:36

The licensing tutorial was removed pending an overhaul. No amount of asking has resulted in any estimation of when the tutorial will be edited and reposted.

Julia Christina Eneroth has posted her own licensing tutorial with test code at GitHub:
https://github.com/Eneroth3/Sketchup-Api-Licensing-Test

Dan Rathbun · 15 May 2017, 19:39

There is a problem with licensing. You will likely NOT pass the extension review if you alter the DCFunctionsV1 class in your extension code.

TIG · 15 May 2017, 21:42

This has been discussed in a circle !

I said earlier that any code which was altering a 'built-in' class [like the DC's] was like to fall foul of the EW checkers, and of course [thereby] its licensing regime...
It would be possible to write a 'non-compliant' extension which did change the DC's class and publish it BUT it can't be downloaded through the EW [there are many other options] - and if it's to be licensed it'll have to be done through another licensing system [again there are several others]...

It is somewhat perverse that SketchUp freely distributes its DC tools, but then does not allow any additions to be made to that code - even with the strictest trapping to avoid overwriting new methods or clashing with other authors - it seems to make the DCs something of an evolutionary dead-end...

Dan Rathbun · 19 May 2017, 20:22

(TIG, I know you said this, but apparently the OP didn't understand it well.)

I would prefer that Trimble updates the DC code to add all those missing math functions that Scott did not implement, (... perhaps because Google Docs Spreadsheets did not support them at that time ?)

And then I'd like them to be serious about implementing nifty new DC Functions that users request, in a timely manner !

michaelwhksg · 21 May 2017, 21:16

Thanks, Dan. Will take a look at Julia's tutorial.

I do agree that some improvements can be made to the DC functionalities. This will definitely benefit a lot of users.