"other" keyword scope issue in structs?

[old spear]

when is open() called?

Would be good to show the code on that… But I have another question anyway

Is this project recently made from 2024.11 and beyond?

Depending on how that code for open() is called, I suspect you were relying on what is now deprecated behaviour

Game options -> Main -> Deprecated Behaviours

There should be an option for other scope w/ methods

You can check the box if you just want it to work again

It’s more relevant than one would think 😉

Yeah okay

I definitely am believing it’s due to the other changes

GameMaker now has it so other changes to the current self, before applying the new self, from the method call (as this didn’t previously do this)

[old spear]

You can go back to the old method this way

Well yes, the old way is deprecated

You can just change it back for this project if you want

Just a checkbox away

global.a = { };
global.b = { };
global.c = { };

var f = method(c, function () {
  show_message(self == global.c);  // true
  show_message(other == global.b); // false
  show_message(other == global.a); // true
});

with (global.a) {
  with (global.b) {
    f();
  }
}

Basically this is the old behaviour

If you go through multiple withs() and call a method bound to another unrelated instance/struct, it’ll have global.a as other

The change makes it so global.b is other

Making it the last self scope, other in this case

This also applies to methods that have a bound scope

Calling a method that calls another method, even if the scope is the same, will also push up the self to other, before applying self from the current method scope

Which is exactly the issue you’re facing with Snowstate

Because struct that you pass in to Snowstate, makes new methods out of all of the events, using the owner as the scope

The contents of the code there was defined in a script

Script scope is global

So doing foo = "bar" would be the same as global.foo = "bar" (you can basically pretend “c” is “global.c”)

But otherwise yes

You are correct

Yes

I assume via with() and out of SnowState too, but also yes

Actually I believe that is technically 3 scope changes realistically

Snowstate, then the method that Snowstate bound the scope of the owner of the state machine to (which I assume is __), then the scope of __

But I digress

In short, other isn’t truly accurate to rely on in most cases.

If you need to reference that specific instance, it’s best to pass it along in some other matter (function arguments, a struct variable, a fake closure, a global variable, etc)

[red field]

yes!