Dynamic Component DCFunctionsV1 within in Module

michaelwhksg

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

@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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

(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

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.

michaelwhksg

Just an update to everyone.

After a few rounds of re-submission of my extension to meet the stringent requirements, this time, it is taking slightly longer than usual. I am still waiting for the status of being published in the Extended Warehouse.

In any case, below are some of the screenshots I have created for the extension.

michaelwhksg

Hi, does anyone know how long it takes to get an extension approved by the Extension Warehouse Team normally?

After a few rounds of back and forth and updating the extension, I submitted the extension again on 29May. Aside from getting the one auto-response, I did not hear anything else.

I then resubmitted again on 13June. Still no change in the status.

Any advice on this?

Dan Rathbun

They have been known to be slow. Perhaps it's the summer vacation season ?

michaelwhksg

Oh I see. Thanks a lot Dan. Will wait for the feedback from them then.

michaelwhksg

Hi TIG and Dan, good news. My extension is being approved by the EWH team and the trial version is now in the Extension Store.

SketchUp Extension Warehouse

Your library of custom third-party extensions created to optimize your SketchUp workflow.

(extensions.sketchup.com)

Like you mentioned previously, the EWH team initially rejected the idea of having the DCFunctionsV1 approach. After I explained the rationale of using it, they finally gave the approval.

Seems like there's light at the end of the tunnel.

Thanks.

My next challenge will be the licensing issue.

I went thru Julia Christina Eneroth's tutorial, but still have some questions. For example, in the code, ext_id = "15dfa30f-4957-4549-8cdb-e97b5727a13a", I am unsure how this comes about.

Anyway, one way I circumvent this is to have the trial version in the Extension Store and the full version in my website (still fixing up the shopping cart in my website though).

Thank for the guidance. You guys rock!

TIG

A miracle for common-sense - well done !

Dan Rathbun

@michaelwhksg said:

My next challenge will be the licensing issue.

Please start a new topic, or find one that is already on this subject.

Dan Rathbun

@michaelwhksg said:

Like you mentioned previously, the EWH team initially rejected the idea of having the DCFunctionsV1 approach. After I explained the rationale of using it, they finally gave the approval.

Remember I said this ?

@dan rathbun said:

(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.

I really hope you used a unique function name and not atan2 as you had previously defined it early on.

michaelwhksg

Will look into the licensing aspect in the forum, Dan.

Yes, you are right. I have used a unique function name for my extension. atan2 is just an example.

By the way, I have sort of documented the steps I took to create the DC extension and have it published in the Extension Warehouse.

Just to share with anyone who is interested. It is actually for my own reference in future.

Creation of extension and submission to Extension Warehouse