I think this shows a bug: file1.scad: module m1(){echo("file1 m1");} module m2(){echo("file1 m2");} file2.scad: use <file1.scad> module m1() { echo("file2 m1"); } file3.scad: use <file1.scad> module m2() { echo("file3 m2"); } main.scad: use <file1.scad> use <file2.scad> use <file3.scad> m1(); m2(); ECHO: "file1 m1" ECHO: "file3 m2" I think m1 should come from file2.scad and it does if I comment out use<file1.scad> from main. On Fri, 17 Jan 2020 at 16:26, nop head <nop.head@gmail.com> wrote: > I use "use" to mean use<> and "include" to mean include<>. > > Unfortunately my code is far too big to post as it is a 3D printer made > from hundreds of files and so far I haven't managed to distil a small > example . > > I don't fully understand the paragraph you quoted but it sounds like it > might be relevant but still doesn't explain why two PCs give different > results with the same code. > > On Fri, 17 Jan 2020 at 11:20, MichaelAtOz <oz.at.michael@gmail.com> wrote: > >> It would help if you utilised 'use<>', 'include<>' when you refer to >> syntax >> v's generic use or include as normal words. A compact example would help. >> >> Without the code, I can't visualise what you are doing. >> >> I also note the wiki mentions: >> Nested Include and Use >> OpenSCAD will execute nested calls to include and use. There is one caveat >> to this, that use only brings functions and modules into the local file >> context. As a result, nested calls to use will have no effect on the >> environment of the base file; the child use call will work in the parent >> use >> context, but the modules and functions so imported will fall out of >> context >> before they are seen by the base context. >> >> >> >> ----- >> Admin - email* me if you need anything, or if I've done something >> stupid... >> >> * click on my MichaelAtOz label, there is a link to email me. >> >> Unless specifically shown otherwise above, my contribution is in the >> Public Domain; to the extent possible under law, I have waived all >> copyright and related or neighbouring rights to this work. Obviously >> inclusion of works of previous authors is not included in the above. >> >> -- >> Sent from: http://forum.openscad.org/ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> OpenSCAD mailing list >> Discuss@lists.openscad.org >> http://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org >> >

If I swap the order of uses: use <file1.scad> use <file3.scad> use <file2.scad> m1(); m2(); I get: ECHO: "file2 m1" ECHO: "file1 m2" So this time m2 is wrong. Why does changing the order make a difference? On Sun, 19 Jan 2020 at 13:13, nop head <nop.head@gmail.com> wrote: > I think this shows a bug: > > file1.scad: > module m1(){echo("file1 m1");} > module m2(){echo("file1 m2");} > > file2.scad: > use <file1.scad> > module m1() { echo("file2 m1"); } > > file3.scad: > use <file1.scad> > module m2() { echo("file3 m2"); } > > main.scad: > use <file1.scad> > use <file2.scad> > use <file3.scad> > m1(); > m2(); > > ECHO: "file1 m1" > > ECHO: "file3 m2" > > > I think m1 should come from file2.scad and it does if I comment out > use<file1.scad> from main. > > > On Fri, 17 Jan 2020 at 16:26, nop head <nop.head@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I use "use" to mean use<> and "include" to mean include<>. >> >> Unfortunately my code is far too big to post as it is a 3D printer made >> from hundreds of files and so far I haven't managed to distil a small >> example . >> >> I don't fully understand the paragraph you quoted but it sounds like it >> might be relevant but still doesn't explain why two PCs give different >> results with the same code. >> >> On Fri, 17 Jan 2020 at 11:20, MichaelAtOz <oz.at.michael@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> It would help if you utilised 'use<>', 'include<>' when you refer to >>> syntax >>> v's generic use or include as normal words. A compact example would help. >>> >>> Without the code, I can't visualise what you are doing. >>> >>> I also note the wiki mentions: >>> Nested Include and Use >>> OpenSCAD will execute nested calls to include and use. There is one >>> caveat >>> to this, that use only brings functions and modules into the local file >>> context. As a result, nested calls to use will have no effect on the >>> environment of the base file; the child use call will work in the parent >>> use >>> context, but the modules and functions so imported will fall out of >>> context >>> before they are seen by the base context. >>> >>> >>> >>> ----- >>> Admin - email* me if you need anything, or if I've done something >>> stupid... >>> >>> * click on my MichaelAtOz label, there is a link to email me. >>> >>> Unless specifically shown otherwise above, my contribution is in the >>> Public Domain; to the extent possible under law, I have waived all >>> copyright and related or neighbouring rights to this work. Obviously >>> inclusion of works of previous authors is not included in the above. >>> >>> -- >>> Sent from: http://forum.openscad.org/ >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> OpenSCAD mailing list >>> Discuss@lists.openscad.org >>> http://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org >>> >>

It looks like it simply uses the last seen definition. In that regard, use<> and include<> would probably yield the same result. Use<> imports functions and modules into its scope, so indirect use<> would let all these bubble up. Whether this is good behaviour or not is a different discussion. Do you feel that this behaviour has changed recently? -Marius > On Jan 19, 2020, at 08:13, nop head <nop.head@gmail.com> wrote: > > I think this shows a bug: > > file1.scad: > module m1(){echo("file1 m1");} > module m2(){echo("file1 m2");} > > file2.scad: > use <file1.scad> > module m1() { echo("file2 m1"); } > > file3.scad: > use <file1.scad> > module m2() { echo("file3 m2"); } > > main.scad: > use <file1.scad> > use <file2.scad> > use <file3.scad> > m1(); > m2(); > > ECHO: "file1 m1" > ECHO: "file3 m2" > > I think m1 should come from file2.scad and it does if I comment out use<file1.scad> from main. > > > On Fri, 17 Jan 2020 at 16:26, nop head <nop.head@gmail.com <mailto:nop.head@gmail.com>> wrote: > I use "use" to mean use<> and "include" to mean include<>. > > Unfortunately my code is far too big to post as it is a 3D printer made from hundreds of files and so far I haven't managed to distil a small example . > > I don't fully understand the paragraph you quoted but it sounds like it might be relevant but still doesn't explain why two PCs give different results with the same code. > > On Fri, 17 Jan 2020 at 11:20, MichaelAtOz <oz.at.michael@gmail.com <mailto:oz.at.michael@gmail.com>> wrote: > It would help if you utilised 'use<>', 'include<>' when you refer to syntax > v's generic use or include as normal words. A compact example would help. > > Without the code, I can't visualise what you are doing. > > I also note the wiki mentions: > Nested Include and Use > OpenSCAD will execute nested calls to include and use. There is one caveat > to this, that use only brings functions and modules into the local file > context. As a result, nested calls to use will have no effect on the > environment of the base file; the child use call will work in the parent use > context, but the modules and functions so imported will fall out of context > before they are seen by the base context. > > > > ----- > Admin - email* me if you need anything, or if I've done something stupid... > > * click on my MichaelAtOz label, there is a link to email me. > > Unless specifically shown otherwise above, my contribution is in the Public Domain; to the extent possible under law, I have waived all copyright and related or neighbouring rights to this work. Obviously inclusion of works of previous authors is not included in the above. > > -- > Sent from: http://forum.openscad.org/ <http://forum.openscad.org/> > > _______________________________________________ > OpenSCAD mailing list > Discuss@lists.openscad.org <mailto:Discuss@lists.openscad.org> > http://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org <http://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org> > _______________________________________________ > OpenSCAD mailing list > Discuss@lists.openscad.org > http://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org

It should use the last definition but it doesn't. Names from indirect used files should not be visible. I don't know if behaviour has changed. All I know is that it behaves differently on two machines and on the machine I have access to ATM it is wrong. On Sun, 19 Jan 2020, 21:17 Marius Kintel, <kintel@kintel.net> wrote: > It looks like it simply uses the last seen definition. In that regard, > use<> and include<> would probably yield the same result. > Use<> imports functions and modules into its scope, so indirect use<> > would let all these bubble up. > > Whether this is good behaviour or not is a different discussion. > Do you feel that this behaviour has changed recently? > > -Marius > > On Jan 19, 2020, at 08:13, nop head <nop.head@gmail.com> wrote: > > I think this shows a bug: > > file1.scad: > module m1(){echo("file1 m1");} > module m2(){echo("file1 m2");} > > file2.scad: > use <file1.scad> > module m1() { echo("file2 m1"); } > > file3.scad: > use <file1.scad> > module m2() { echo("file3 m2"); } > > main.scad: > use <file1.scad> > use <file2.scad> > use <file3.scad> > m1(); > m2(); > > ECHO: "file1 m1" > ECHO: "file3 m2" > > I think m1 should come from file2.scad and it does if I comment out > use<file1.scad> from main. > > > On Fri, 17 Jan 2020 at 16:26, nop head <nop.head@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I use "use" to mean use<> and "include" to mean include<>. >> >> Unfortunately my code is far too big to post as it is a 3D printer made >> from hundreds of files and so far I haven't managed to distil a small >> example . >> >> I don't fully understand the paragraph you quoted but it sounds like it >> might be relevant but still doesn't explain why two PCs give different >> results with the same code. >> >> On Fri, 17 Jan 2020 at 11:20, MichaelAtOz <oz.at.michael@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> It would help if you utilised 'use<>', 'include<>' when you refer to >>> syntax >>> v's generic use or include as normal words. A compact example would help. >>> >>> Without the code, I can't visualise what you are doing. >>> >>> I also note the wiki mentions: >>> Nested Include and Use >>> OpenSCAD will execute nested calls to include and use. There is one >>> caveat >>> to this, that use only brings functions and modules into the local file >>> context. As a result, nested calls to use will have no effect on the >>> environment of the base file; the child use call will work in the parent >>> use >>> context, but the modules and functions so imported will fall out of >>> context >>> before they are seen by the base context. >>> >>> >>> >>> ----- >>> Admin - email* me if you need anything, or if I've done something >>> stupid... >>> >>> * click on my MichaelAtOz label, there is a link to email me. >>> >>> Unless specifically shown otherwise above, my contribution is in the >>> Public Domain; to the extent possible under law, I have waived all >>> copyright and related or neighbouring rights to this work. Obviously >>> inclusion of works of previous authors is not included in the above. >>> >>> -- >>> Sent from: http://forum.openscad.org/ >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> OpenSCAD mailing list >>> Discuss@lists.openscad.org >>> http://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org >>> >> _______________________________________________ > OpenSCAD mailing list > Discuss@lists.openscad.org > http://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org > > > _______________________________________________ > OpenSCAD mailing list > Discuss@lists.openscad.org > http://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org >

file1 defines default implementations for m1 and m2. file2 defines m1 and file3 defines m2. Since they are both used after file1 then both m1 and m2 should be overridden but only one is. Both file2 and file3 use file1 but any names in file1 should not be exported from file2 or file3. I appears perhaps the use of file1 is leaked from file2 and file3 but if file1 is not included in main then they don't. So something weird is going wrong and is seems to be machine dependent but as I only have access to one machine at a time it is hard to prove that. On Sun, 19 Jan 2020 at 21:24, nop head <nop.head@gmail.com> wrote: > It should use the last definition but it doesn't. Names from indirect used > files should not be visible. > > I don't know if behaviour has changed. All I know is that it behaves > differently on two machines and on the machine I have access to ATM it is > wrong. > > On Sun, 19 Jan 2020, 21:17 Marius Kintel, <kintel@kintel.net> wrote: > >> It looks like it simply uses the last seen definition. In that regard, >> use<> and include<> would probably yield the same result. >> Use<> imports functions and modules into its scope, so indirect use<> >> would let all these bubble up. >> >> Whether this is good behaviour or not is a different discussion. >> Do you feel that this behaviour has changed recently? >> >> -Marius >> >> On Jan 19, 2020, at 08:13, nop head <nop.head@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> I think this shows a bug: >> >> file1.scad: >> module m1(){echo("file1 m1");} >> module m2(){echo("file1 m2");} >> >> file2.scad: >> use <file1.scad> >> module m1() { echo("file2 m1"); } >> >> file3.scad: >> use <file1.scad> >> module m2() { echo("file3 m2"); } >> >> main.scad: >> use <file1.scad> >> use <file2.scad> >> use <file3.scad> >> m1(); >> m2(); >> >> ECHO: "file1 m1" >> ECHO: "file3 m2" >> >> I think m1 should come from file2.scad and it does if I comment out >> use<file1.scad> from main. >> >> >> On Fri, 17 Jan 2020 at 16:26, nop head <nop.head@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> I use "use" to mean use<> and "include" to mean include<>. >>> >>> Unfortunately my code is far too big to post as it is a 3D printer made >>> from hundreds of files and so far I haven't managed to distil a small >>> example . >>> >>> I don't fully understand the paragraph you quoted but it sounds like it >>> might be relevant but still doesn't explain why two PCs give different >>> results with the same code. >>> >>> On Fri, 17 Jan 2020 at 11:20, MichaelAtOz <oz.at.michael@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> It would help if you utilised 'use<>', 'include<>' when you refer to >>>> syntax >>>> v's generic use or include as normal words. A compact example would >>>> help. >>>> >>>> Without the code, I can't visualise what you are doing. >>>> >>>> I also note the wiki mentions: >>>> Nested Include and Use >>>> OpenSCAD will execute nested calls to include and use. There is one >>>> caveat >>>> to this, that use only brings functions and modules into the local file >>>> context. As a result, nested calls to use will have no effect on the >>>> environment of the base file; the child use call will work in the >>>> parent use >>>> context, but the modules and functions so imported will fall out of >>>> context >>>> before they are seen by the base context. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ----- >>>> Admin - email* me if you need anything, or if I've done something >>>> stupid... >>>> >>>> * click on my MichaelAtOz label, there is a link to email me. >>>> >>>> Unless specifically shown otherwise above, my contribution is in the >>>> Public Domain; to the extent possible under law, I have waived all >>>> copyright and related or neighbouring rights to this work. Obviously >>>> inclusion of works of previous authors is not included in the above. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Sent from: http://forum.openscad.org/ >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> OpenSCAD mailing list >>>> Discuss@lists.openscad.org >>>> http://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >> OpenSCAD mailing list >> Discuss@lists.openscad.org >> http://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> OpenSCAD mailing list >> Discuss@lists.openscad.org >> http://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org >> >

On Jan 19, 2020, at 16:24, nop head <nop.head@gmail.com> wrote: > > It should use the last definition but it doesn't. Names from indirect used files should not be visible. > Yeah, I haven’t reviewed the code, but it feels like it uses the last definition taking all indirect used files into account. While I agree that this doesn’t feel right, I’m not sure we can just change it without potentially breaking a lot of existing code. -Marius

I get the same on my W7 VM, OpenSCAD 2019.05; ECHO: "file1 m1" ECHO: "file3 m2" But W7 VM, OpenSCAD 2015.03 I get; ECHO: "file2 m1" ECHO: "file3 m2" But on Debian, OpenSCAD 2019.12.22.nightly, & 2015.03 ECHO: "file2 m1" ECHO: "file3 m2" So looks like Windows 2019.05 is wrong. ----- Admin - email* me if you need anything, or if I've done something stupid... * click on my MichaelAtOz label, there is a link to email me. Unless specifically shown otherwise above, my contribution is in the Public Domain; to the extent possible under law, I have waived all copyright and related or neighbouring rights to this work. Obviously inclusion of works of previous authors is not included in the above. -- Sent from: http://forum.openscad.org/

Curiously this order gives the intended result but shouldn't. use <file2.scad> use <file1.scad> use <file3.scad> m1(); m2(); ECHO: "file2 m1" ECHO: "file3 m2" So it seems that the search order for these three files is last, first, second or first, last, second. Odd that the search order seems to depend on the order of usage but in a non-logical way and machine and platform dependent. Perhaps the wrong type of container is being used. On Mon, 20 Jan 2020 at 03:52, MichaelAtOz <oz.at.michael@gmail.com> wrote: > I get the same on my W7 VM, OpenSCAD 2019.05; > ECHO: "file1 m1" > ECHO: "file3 m2" > > But W7 VM, OpenSCAD 2015.03 I get; > ECHO: "file2 m1" > ECHO: "file3 m2" > > But on Debian, OpenSCAD 2019.12.22.nightly, & 2015.03 > ECHO: "file2 m1" > ECHO: "file3 m2" > > So looks like Windows 2019.05 is wrong. > > > > > ----- > Admin - email* me if you need anything, or if I've done something > stupid... > > * click on my MichaelAtOz label, there is a link to email me. > > Unless specifically shown otherwise above, my contribution is in the > Public Domain; to the extent possible under law, I have waived all > copyright and related or neighbouring rights to this work. Obviously > inclusion of works of previous authors is not included in the above. > > -- > Sent from: http://forum.openscad.org/ > > _______________________________________________ > OpenSCAD mailing list > Discuss@lists.openscad.org > http://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org >

You did some work on caching the use/include files IIRC, did that have any debug calls that could help, ie command line --debug? ----- Admin - email* me if you need anything, or if I've done something stupid... * click on my MichaelAtOz label, there is a link to email me. Unless specifically shown otherwise above, my contribution is in the Public Domain; to the extent possible under law, I have waived all copyright and related or neighbouring rights to this work. Obviously inclusion of works of previous authors is not included in the above. -- Sent from: http://forum.openscad.org/

The work I did was on dependency tracking of uses and includes in order to decide what needs to be re-parsed and compiled to update the preview. It is a much earlier phase than module instantiation name lookup. I am struggling to understand how that works. On Mon, 20 Jan 2020 at 09:51, MichaelAtOz <oz.at.michael@gmail.com> wrote: > You did some work on caching the use/include files IIRC, did that have any > debug calls that could help, ie command line --debug? > > > > ----- > Admin - email* me if you need anything, or if I've done something > stupid... > > * click on my MichaelAtOz label, there is a link to email me. > > Unless specifically shown otherwise above, my contribution is in the > Public Domain; to the extent possible under law, I have waived all > copyright and related or neighbouring rights to this work. Obviously > inclusion of works of previous authors is not included in the above. > > -- > Sent from: http://forum.openscad.org/ > > _______________________________________________ > OpenSCAD mailing list > Discuss@lists.openscad.org > http://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org >