Add hook and extension variables features

I’d wanted to see any of these new possibilities in Wurst. I believe they’re very helpful in some rare occasions to keep code clean and well-organized, at least for me. For extension variables I mean something like UnitWrapper ... int UnitWrapper.killCount ... u.killCount += 1 as an example. I think that their initialization can be hooked to construct and onDestroy (like hook UnitWrapper.construct /n/t killCount = 0 for my example). And I mean they’re restricted to class types only. Probably they could be allowed only with special flags like hookable and extensible.

[peq]

I don’t like the concept of hooks. It is like the COMEFROM statement and makes it very hard to read and debug source code.

If you want to call some functions every time a certain class is constructed or destroyed, you can use callFunctionsWithAnnotation. Put callFunctionsWithAnnotation("@unitwrapperConstructorHook") into the constructor of UnitWrapper and then all functions annotated with @unitwrapperConstructorHook will be called. You can also use the classical observer pattern, but of course that requires some overhead.

[IgorSamurovic]

For all the effort that went into a design to move things in wurst away from the global scope, you want a feature that essentially works in the global scope. And what you want to accomplish can be solved with one mass replace. When you see a function SetUnitMoveSpeed, you need to know what it does. It is a native, so you should be familiar with it. If it is hooked to do some random thing somewhere else, then you no longer know what it does, and nobody reading your code should be expected to randomly know it is hooked to something else somewhere else.

Even partial classes suffer from this problem to a degree, which is why they are to be applied only in specific circumstances - when you know where all the parts are, and they mostly affect the class’ scope, not the global scope, aside from when you actually use the extension methods, of course.