Sorry this is a very newbie question.
We have this massive application I am doing maintenance on. It has 5 d开发者_JS百科ifferent forms. We put our global variables in one unit (uGlobal). But i can't seem to access it from the data unit (uData).
I have this:
Unit uGlobal
type
TmyType: (alpha, beta);
...
Unit uGlobal
Stuff: TmyType <- error, undeclared indentifier
When i try to put uGlobal in the uses section of uData, it complains of a circular reference. So, kinda clueless here. They are both in the same project. This is using BDS 2006.
You have a circular reference because you have things in uGlobal
that want to make use of things in uData
and vice-versa. Circular references are a big concern in large projects because they greatly increase complexity - if you have circular dependencies, it becomes more like one BIGGER unit. I suspect you have a long way to go before your project can be considered large, let alone "massive". ;)
You have 2 possible solutions:
- Go with the circular dependency, making one dependency weak, and the other strong.
- Apply a little redesign to eliminate the problem alogether. (Break things into smaller chunks.)
Keeping the circular dependency
David has already given the answer: At least one of the units must use the other from the implementation section.
- A uses B uses A is absolutely not allowed, but you can think of the interface and implementation sections as being almost like separate units themselves (with a bunch of special referencing rules).
- So ask yourself what does each sub-unit need?
- If for example:
- You declared a type in
uData interface
and referenced that inuGlobal interface
, then the interface ofuGlobal
needsuData
and will need a corresponding uses clause. - If there's a type in
uData implementation
that's referenced in anywhereuGlobal
, then that declaration inuData implementation
must be moved to the interface section. - If there's a type in
uGlobal interface
must it's only referenced from the implementation section ofuData
then that uses clause will be fine in the implementation section.
- You declared a type in
- If you have the unfortunate situation that types in both interface sections reference types in the other interface section, then you have to to modularise a little more by applying the technique to Remove Circular Dependency.
Remove Circular Dependency
Removing the circular dependency requires breaking your units down into smaller ones that are more manageable. To do this, you must understand the dependencies between each of the things in your application. For example:
- Suppose
uGlobal
declares A and C - A depends on C, but C doesn't need A
- Suppose also that
uData
declares B which needs C - But it turns out that A also needs B
- This is why you have the circular dependency
All you have to do in this case is declare a new unit at move C in there.
- Then both
uGlobal
anduData
will useuNewUnit
- But neither will need the other
- And your circular dependency will be removed entirely.
Disclaimer
I am not in any way advocating your approach with uGlobal. In fact it is a very bad idea and will bite you big time on 2 fronts when your projects starts to get large. Unfortunately the explanation is a mammoth answer in itself.
- Use of global variables at all is dangerous and to be avoided.
- Use of 'big dumping units' like uGlobal and uData is also dangerous, and you've only just satrted to experience their problems.
Use the second 'uses', the one in the 'implementation' section
unit uData;
uses SysUtils, etc;
type
etc;
implementation
uses uGlobal;
// here you can reference things in uGlobal
Generally David Zimmerman's answer is the way to go, but in your case (according to your response to David's answer), you need TMyType in the interface section of uGlobal unit; therefore adding uData to uses clause of the implementation section won't help.
Seems it is time for refactoring; you should consider moving TMyType or Stuff into a third unit, so that both uData and uGlobal can reference to it.
精彩评论