Is the use of `MetaClass.__index = Class` - bad practice?

Help and Feedback Scripting Support
#1

I was thinking about how to hide the ability to call methods using dot notation and found a way. I wanted to ask, is this code by any chance an ‘embodiment of stupidity,’ because in my local chat with my scripter friends, they called me an idiot. Look:

--!strict

local MyClass = {}
local MyClassMeta = {}
MyClassMeta.__index = MyClass

local function new(num)
	local self = setmetatable({}, MyClassMeta)
	self.Value = num
	return self
end

function MyClass:GetValue()
	return self.Value
end

return {
	new = new,
	Class = MyClass
}
--By the way, yes, this method works.

image

#2

Nope. This is totally fine. In fact, it helps prevent another quirk: the ability to call the class’ constructor from an instance of the class, which also means chain-calling:

local instance = Class.new().new().new().new()

Keeping the class separated from the metatable that binds it to instances of that class cleans things up in general. I wouldn’t say you should justify this as a means to avoid auto-completion when indexing with the dot operator though. There are times where it’s convenient to do that

2 Likes
#3

why not set MyClassMeta.__index to MyClassMeta

local MyClass = {}
local MyClassMeta = {}
MyClassMeta.__index = MyClassMeta

local function new(num)
	local self = setmetatable({}, MyClassMeta)
	self.Value = num
	return self
end

function MyClassMeta:GetValue()
	return self.Value
end

return {
	new = new,
	Class = MyClass
}
--By the way, yes, this method works.
1 Like
#4

then a cyclic __index will appear, and from it it will already be possible to use getValue through a .
image

1 Like