Storing a closure within an object

I’ve made a SkookumscriptBehavior which takes a closure through it’s constructor. I then bind that closure to a member of that object.

(() code) [
  //code() <-- this executes correctly

  @code: code

calling the closure immediately works fine… but if I bind it to a member and then try and call it from that member (@code()), I get this error:

Non-closure invoke operator 'expr()' is not fully implemented yet.

Is something like this not possible yet?

What type do you specify for your @code data member?

I did also find an error in the parser that returns the incorrect type for a closure in some cases which could be related.

I didn’t know what to specify the type as, so I was hoping it would be inferred.

[Hey, missed your response.]

If the closure that you are storing is a method (runs and returns immediately) here is how you specify the data member class type in its ! file:

// Method closure that takes no arguments and doesn't return anything
() !@code

And here are some other types of closures:

// Method closure that takes an Integer argument and doesn't return anything
(Integer num) !@code2

// Method closure that takes an Integer argument and returns a Boolean
(Integer num) Boolean !@code3

// Coroutine closure that takes an Integer argument
_(Integer num) !@code4

// Coroutine/method closure that takes an Integer argument
+(Integer num) !@code5

Ohh ok, thanks for the clarification!

Is there a reason not to use the + at all times? Performance or clarity? It seems like one should always use this notation because it covers everything.

It depends on the needs of the situation. There are times when you want to have a closure that returns immediately such as in an if test. There are times when you want a closure to take one or more frames before it completes such as in a tight infinite loop. And there are times when it doesn’t matter and you can use the + to indicate that either immediate or durational will be fine such as an event trigger.