I have noticed a trend occuring where everyone must initialize their libraries in struct onInit methods, otherwise they face the possibility of something like this occuring:
JASS:
library A initializer Foo requires Table
globals
private Table t
endglobals
public function UseTable takes nothing returns nothing
set t[0] = 777
endfunction
private function Foo takes nothing returns nothing
set t = Table.create()
endfunction
endlibrary
library B requires A
private struct DoInit
private static method onInit takes nothing returns nothing
call A_UseTable()
endmethod
endstruct
endlibrary
Notice that if A wants to be usable by libraries that initialize stuff in a struct onInit, it must upgrade its own initializer to a struct onInit. Several libraries have fallen prey to this anti-trend: Table, AbilityPreload... I was just about to ask Dusk to change IntuitiveDamageDetection to use a struct onInit before I realized this.
Eventually, every library for which it could cause issues winds up using a struct onInit, and we're back to square one, with the libraries initializing in the same order, but now with mangled code. So what I'm proposing is that struct onInits no longer take precedence over EVERY library initializer. Only the ones within its own library/scope. Example below:
JASS:
library A initializer Init
struct AFoo
private method onInit takes nothing returns nothing
call BJDebugMsg("This prints 1st")
endmethod
endstruct
private method Init takes nothing returns nothing
call BJDebugMsg("This prints 2nd")
endmethod
endlibrary
library B initializer Init requires A
private method Init takes nothing returns nothing
call BJDebugMsg("This prints 5th")
endmethod
struct BFoo
private method onInit takes nothing returns nothing
call BJDebugMsg("This prints 3rd")
endmethod
endstruct
struct BFoo2
private method onInit takes nothing returns nothing
call BJDebugMsg("This prints 4th")
endmethod
endstruct
endlibrary
(Also, module onInits would run before just before their implementing struct onInits, rather than before
everything like they do right now.)
This is a change that affects existing code, but as far as I can tell it should not cause any adverse effects. If anyone can find an example where it would cause issues, please post an example.
Basically, I have realized that once you allow different priority levels for initialization, you're going to wind up with a slippery slope effect where everyone has to compensate. It would be much better if you can assume that your required libraries are done initializing by the time yours starts.
