Scripting Helpers is winding down operations and is now read-only. More info→
Log in to vote
1
Is this the correct way to define a _G. Function?
I'm experimenting with a type of variable/function that is new to me (_G.)
I tried defining a function like this:
1 | _G.function MyFunction() |
2 | --code here |
3 | end) |
However the script editor gave me a red line, so I changed it to this:
1 | _G.MyFunction = function() |
2 | --code here |
3 | end) |
For my future reference, is the second way the correct way to define _G. functions?
1 answer
Log in to vote
0
When defining functions in any table (_G is a table too), you can do it in two main ways; either like this:
1 | _G.MyFunction = function() |
2 | --code here |
3 | end) |
or like this:
1 | function _G.MyFunction() |
2 | -- code here |
3 | end) |
While this is not related to your specific case of _G, you can also do this:
1 | function MyTable:MyFunction() |
2 | -- code here |
3 | end) |
This will define the function in such a way that the first argument will always be refered to as self, and if you later call the function like MyTable:MyFunction() then the first argument will be the table itself. This can be used for OOP in Lua.
0
Thanks! ShadowsDev 62 — 8y
0
I would not consider lua OO without classes or structures ADeadlyGuest4 62 — 8y