Dynamic Functions

[UnderscoreTud]

Description

This PR adds the long-awaited feature to Skript, dynamic functions! Functions are now objects that can be dealt with inside scripts with the new function type. To get a function object, you use the ExprFunction expression.
Example:

set {_func} to function "sum"

You can even get local functions from other scripts, like so:

set {_func} to function "foo" in script "hello"

Using these objects you can execute or get the result of a function's execution dynamically, like so:

set {_func} to function "product"
set {_result} to execution result of {_func} with arguments 3, 4 and 5
broadcast {_result} # 60

---

Target Minecraft Versions: any
Requirements: none
Related Issues: #1265

[Pikachu920]

I like the idea of being able to call functions dynamically, but I'm hesitant to add functions as first-class objects.

[UnderscoreTud]

I like the idea of being able to call functions dynamically, but I'm hesitant to add functions as first-class objects.

What do you suggest? I did it so the patterns are not too long with the ability to specify which script the function is declared in, and also it doesn't look pretty to shove everything into one pattern like so: (call|execute|run) [the] [:global] function[s] [named] %strings% [(in|from) [script] [file] %-string%] [(using|with) [[the] (argument|parameter)[s]] %-objects%]. It's just a mess, implementation wise as well

[AyhamAl-Ali]

Well done Tud ⚡ I like this feature

[AyhamAl-Ali]

I would prefer having a more in depth example for this specific advanced feature, like add 2 functions with the possible names and params

[UnderscoreTud]

I'm not sure what you mean

[AyhamAl-Ali]

Here is an example which you can commit if you like :)

Suggested change

	@Examples("run function \"rotate_%{_direction}%\" with {_structure-name}")
	@Examples({
	"function rotate_north(structure: text):",
	"\t# code",
	"",
	"function rotate_east(structure: text):",
	"\t# code",
	"",
	"run function \"rotate_%{_direction}%\" with {_structure-name}"
	})

[AyhamAl-Ali]

Suggested change

	if (!script.endsWith(".sk")) script += ".sk";
	if (!script.endsWith(".sk"))
	script += ".sk";

[AyhamAl-Ali]

Let's use better naming here please.

[UnderscoreTud]

I just moved the validation code from FunctionReference and moved it here. I guess I could clean it up as well

[AyhamAl-Ali]

That would be nice :)

[Pikachu920]

I like the idea of being able to call functions dynamically, but I'm hesitant to add functions as first-class objects.

What do you suggest? I did it so the patterns are not too long with the ability to specify which script the function is declared in, and also it doesn't look pretty to shove everything into one pattern like so: (call|execute|run) [the] [:global] function[s] [named] %strings% [(in|from) [script] [file] %-string%] [(using|with) [[the] (argument|parameter)[s]] %-objects%]. It's just a mess, implementation wise as well

that is the route i would take, but i would make it a few patterns. what would make the implementation messy?

[Pikachu920]

here is an example of what i mean:
test: https://github.com/SkriptLang/Skript/blob/feature/dynamic-functions-testing/src/test/skript/tests/syntaxes/effects/EffCallFunction.sk

implementation: https://github.com/SkriptLang/Skript/blob/feature/dynamic-functions-testing/src/main/java/ch/njol/skript/effects/EffCallFunction.java

[ElijahJunaid]

i think adding this would be useful, less lines to parse and probably an overall quicker way to run stuff.
addons already have it and for those who do not wish to add addons, this would benefit them.

[sovdeeth]

Closing due to inactivity and in favor of #6713