Suggestion: add tree loop functionality

[jaylawl]

I was messing around with this idea. I know MundoSK is capable of doing this, but i don't want to add such a huge add-on for just a single thing. That's where this originated anyway:

function treeLoop(root: text) :: texts:
    loop {%{_root}%::*}:
        add "%{_root}%::%loop-index%" to {_tree::*} and {_new::*}
    while {_new::*} is set:
        loop {_new::*}:
            delete {_new::%loop-index%}
            loop {%loop-value-1%::*}:
                add "%loop-value-1%::%loop-index-2%" to {_tree::*} and {_new::*}
    return {_tree::*}

If you'd be using some code like this:

loop treeLoop(<root of list variable>):
    broadcast loop-value

All nested list variables will be found and broadcast under the condition that they're connected by a branch. For example {this::list::variable} can only be found with my code, if the "branch" {this::list} exists and links them.

So my gut feeling, which might of course be wrong, is telling me that, if i was able to somewhat pull this off using a script, it couldn't be much harder an addition to actual Skript. Please share your thoughts, thank you for reading!

Cheers

[Nicofisi]

What's the MundoSk syntax?

[jaylawl]

loop tree of {var::*}:

[TheBentoBox]

I think this is of mild importance (which is why I'm not doing lowest like we do for most enhancements) since right now the way lists work is confusing for some, and looping is one of the pain points since the behavior isn't obvious (sublists aren't looped when looping a list). Tree loops would help.

[TheLimeGlass]

Having a variable type would allow variables to be a parameter which would help with functions. Imo this should be added as it would be an alternative to this.

[TheLimeGlass]

Also fixing variables keeping their index for functions.

And lastly, indexes was added to Skript, so this is possible now.

[Snow-Pyon]

@TheLimeGlass

1. You don't really need a Variable type since you can already check whether an expression is a Variable within init taking object(s). It is just not needed.
2. It is not a fix but rather an enhancement, just clarifying it in case people get the wrong idea. To who doesn't get the reason: Skript is pass-by-value, not passing the indices is a completely understandable behaviour since it is not passing the actual variable reference but just its values.

[TheLimeGlass]

Users don't have access to the init method.

This is in Skript usability for users using variables within functions, not for add-on developers.