Is it possible to extend the console object?
I tried something like:
Console.prototype.log = function(msg){
Console.prototype.log.call(msg);
alert(msg);
}
But this didn't work.
I want to add additional logging to the console object via a framework like log4javascript and still use the standard console object (in cases where log4javascript is not available) in my code.
Thanks in advance!
Try following:
(function() {
var exLog = console.log;
console.log = function(msg) {
exLog.apply(this, arguments);
alert(msg);
}
})()
You Can Also add log Time in This Way :
added Momentjs or use New Date() instead of moment.
var oldConsole = console.log;
console.log = function(){
var timestamp = "[" + moment().format("YYYY-MM-DD HH:mm:ss:SSS") + "] ";
Array.prototype.unshift.call(arguments, timestamp);
oldConsole.apply(this, arguments);
};
It's really the same solution some others have given, but I believe this is the most elegant and least hacky way to accomplish this. The spread syntax (...args) makes sure not a single argument is lost.
var _console={...console}
console.log = function(...args) {
var msg = {...args}[0];
//YOUR_CODE
_console.log(...args);
}
For ECMAScript 2015 and later
You can use the newer Proxy feature from the ECMAScript 2015 standard to "hijack" the global console.log.
Source-Code
'use strict';
class Mocker {
static mockConsoleLog() {
Mocker.oldGlobalConsole = window.console;
window.console = new Proxy(window.console, {
get(target, property) {
if (property === 'log') {
return function(...parameters) {
Mocker.consoleLogReturnValue = parameters.join(' ');
}
}
return target[property];
}
});
}
static unmockConsoleLog() {
window.console = Mocker.oldGlobalConsole;
}
}
Mocker.mockConsoleLog();
console.log('hello'); // nothing happens here
Mocker.unmockConsoleLog();
if (Mocker.consoleLogReturnValue === 'hello') {
console.log('Hello world!'); // Hello world!
alert(Mocker.consoleLogReturnValue);
// anything you want to do with the console log return value here...
}
Online Demo
Repl.it.
Node.js users...
... I do not forget you. You can take this source-code and replace window.console by gloabl.console to properly reference the console object (and of course, get rid of the alert call). In fact, I wrote this code initially and tested it on Node.js.
// console aliases and verbose logger - console doesnt prototype
var c = console;
c.l = c.log,
c.e = c.error,
c.v = c.verbose = function() {
if (!myclass || !myclass.verbose) // verbose switch
return;
var args = Array.prototype.slice.call(arguments); // toArray
args.unshift('Verbose:');
c.l.apply(this, args); // log
};
// you can then do
var myclass = new myClass();
myclass.prototype.verbose = false;
// generally these calls would be inside your class
c.v('1 This will NOT log as verbose == false');
c.l('2 This will log');
myclass.verbose = true;
c.v('3 This will log');
I noted that the above use of Array.prototype.unshift.call by nitesh is a better way to add the 'Verbose:' tag.
You can override the default behavior of the console.log function using the below approach, the below example demonstrates to log the line number using the overridden function.
let line = 0;
const log = console.log;
console.log = (...data) => log(`${++line} ===>`, ...data)
console.log(11, 1, 2)
console.log(11, 1, 'some')
Related
I would like to send back the latest errors/log statements from the console as part of a support-request. I do I retrieve the console through javascript/jquery?
You can also override the console.log
(function(){
if(window.console && console.log){
var old = console.log;
console.log = function(){
doSomthingElse(arguments);
old.apply(this, arguments)
}
}
})();
You can use try... catch
See this example https://jsfiddle.net/j3tfLukr/
var a = {}
try {
var b = a.b.c
} catch(e) {
alert(e);
}
I'm using a run-time assignment of functions to account for browser differences. However for un-supported browsers, I want to return an empty function so that a JavaScript error is not thrown.
But, jslint complains about empty functions. What is the jslint happy way to do this?
Empty block.
$R.functionNull = function () {
// events not supported;
};
$R.Constructor.prototype.createEvent = (function () {
if (doc.createEvent) {
return function (type) {
var event = doc.createEvent("HTMLEvents");
event.initEvent(type, true, false);
$NS.eachKey(this, function (val) {
val.dispatchEvent(event);
});
};
}
if (doc.createEventObject) {
return function (type) {
var event = doc.createEventObject();
event.eventType = type;
$NS.eachKey(this, function (val) {
val.fireEvent('on' + type, event);
});
};
}
return $R.functionNull;
}());
You can add a body to your function and have it return undefined:
$R.functionNull = function() {
// Events not supported.
return undefined;
};
This keeps the same semantics as a "truly empty" function, and should satisfy JSLint.
Use the lambda expression:
$R.functionNull = () => void 0;
For me this works best:
emptyFunction = Function();
console.log(emptyFunction); // logs 'ƒ anonymous() {}'
console.log(emptyFunction()); // logs 'undefined'
It's so short that I wouldn't even assign it to a variable (of course you can also use a constant-like variable "EF" or so, that's even shorter and doesn't need the additioal "()" brackets). Just use "Function()" anywhere you need a truly empty function, that doesn't even have a name, not even when you assign it to a variable, and that's the small behaviour difference between my solution and Frédéric's:
// --- Frédéric ---
emptyFunction = function() {
return undefined;
}
console.log(emptyFunction.name); // logs '"emptyFunction"'
// --- me ---
emptyFunction = Function();
console.log(emptyFunction.name); // logs '""' (or '"anonymous"' in chrome, to be fair)
What about returning
return () => undefined;
instead of
return $R.functionNull;
I am newbie about javascript.So I do not know what is the name of I looking for and How do I do it?
After you read question if you thing question title is wrong, you should change title.
I am using console.log for debugging but this is causing error if browser IE. I made below function for this problem.
var mylog=function(){
if (devmode && window.console){
console.log(arguments);
}
};
mylog("debugging");
Now I want to use all console functions without error and I can do that as below.
var myconsole={
log:function(){
if (devmode && window.console){
console.log(arguments);
}
}
,error:function(){
if (devmode && window.console){
console.error(arguments);
}
}
...
...
...
};
But I do not want to add all console functions to myconsole object severally.
I can do that in PHP with below code.
class MyConsole
{
function __call($func,$args)
{
if ($devmode && function_exists('Console')){
Console::$func($args); // Suppose that there is Console class.
}
}
}
MyConsole::warn("name",$name);
MyConsole::error("lastname",$lastname);
This is possible with __noSuchMethod__ method but this is specific to only firefox.
Thanks for helping.
Unfortunately, you can't do that in JavaScript, the language doesn't have support for the "no such method" concept.
Two options for you:
Option 1:
Use strings for your method name, e.g.:
function myconsole(method) {
var args;
if (devmode && window.console) {
args = Array.prototype.slice.apply(arguments, 1);
window.console[method].apply(window.console, args);
}
}
Usage:
myconsole("log", "message");
myconsole("error", "errormessage");
The meat of myconsole is here:
args = Array.prototype.slice.apply(arguments, 1);
window.console[method].apply(window.console, args);
The first line copies all of the arguments supplied to myconsole except the first one (which is the name of the method we want to use). The second line retrieves the function object for the property named by the string in method from the console object and then calls it via the JavaScript apply function, giving it those arguments.
Option 2:
A second alternative came to me which is best expressed directly in code:
var myconsole = (function() {
var methods = "log debug info warn error assert clear dir dirxml trace group groupCollapsed groupEnd time timeEnd profile profileEnd count exception table".split(' '),
index,
myconsole = {},
realconsole = window.console;
for (index = 0; index < methods.length; ++index) {
proxy(methods[index]);
}
function proxy(method) {
if (!devmode || !realconsole || typeof realconsole[method] !== 'function') {
myconsole[method] = noop;
}
else {
myconsole[method] = function() {
return realconsole[method].apply(realconsole, arguments);
};
}
}
function noop() {
}
return myconsole;
})();
Then you just call log, warn, etc., on myconsole as normal.
Let's say I have var a = function() { return 1; }. Is it possible to alter a so that a() returns 2? Perhaps by editing a property of the a object, since every function is an object?
Update: Wow, thanks for all the responses. However, I'm afraid I wasn't looking to simply reassign a variable but actually edit an existing function. I am thinking along the lines of how you can combine partial functions in Scala to create a new PartialFunction. I am interested in writing something similar in Javascript and was thinking that the existing function could perhaps be updated, rather than creating an entirely new Function object.
You can do all kinds of fun stuff with javascript, including redefining functions:
let a = function() { return 1; }
console.log(a()); // 1
// keep a reference
let old = a;
// redefine
a = function() {
// call the original function with any arguments specified, storing the result
const originalResult = old.apply(old, arguments);
// add one
return originalResult + 1;
};
console.log(a()); // 2
Voila.
Edit: Updated to show this in a crazier scenario:
let test = new String("123");
console.log(test.toString()); // logs 123
console.log(test.substring(0)); // logs 123
String.prototype.substring = function(){ return "hahanope"; }
console.log(test.substring(0)); // logs hahanope
You can see here that even though "test" is defined first, and we redefine substring() afterwards, the change still applies.
Side note: you really should reconsider your architecture if you're doing this...you're going to confuse the crap out of some poor developer 5 years down the road when s/he's looking at a function definition that's supposed to return 1, but seems to always return 2....
So you want to modify the code of a function directly, in place, and not just reassign a different function to an existing variable.
I hate to say it, but as far as I have been able to figure it out - and I have tried -, it can't be done. True, a function is an object, and as such it has methods and properties which can be tweaked and overwritten on the object itself. Unfortunately, the function body is not one of them. It is not assigned to a public property.
The documentation on MDN lists the properties and methods of the function object. None of them gives us the opportunity to manipulate the function body from the outside.
That's because according to the spec, the function body is stored in the internal [[Code]] property of the function object, which can't be accessed directly.
I used something like this to modify an existing function whose declaration was not accessible to me:
// declare function foo
var foo = function (a) { alert(a); };
// modify function foo
foo = new Function (
"a",
foo.toSource()
.replace("alert(a)", "alert('function modified - ' + a)")
.replace(/^function[^{]+{/i,"") // remove everything up to and including the first curly bracket
.replace(/}[^}]*$/i, "") // remove last curly bracket and everything after<br>
);
Instead of toSource() you could probably use toString() to get a string containing the function's declaration. Some calls to replace() to prepare the string for use with the Function Constructor and to modify the function's source.
let a = function() { return 1; }
console.log(a()) // 1
a = function() { return 2; }
console.log(a()) // 2
technically, you're losing one function definition and replacing it with another.
How about this, without having to redefine the function:
var a = function() { return arguments.callee.value || 1; };
alert(a()); // => 1
a.value = 2;
alert(a()); // => 2
I am sticking to jvenema's solution, in which I don't like the global variable "old". It seems better to keep the old function inside of the new one:
function a() { return 1; }
// redefine
a = (function(){
var _a = a;
return function() {
// You may reuse the original function ...
// Typical case: Conditionally use old/new behaviour
var originalResult = _a.apply(this, arguments);
// ... and modify the logic in any way
return originalResult + 1;
}
})();
a() // --> gives 2
All feasible solutions stick to a "function wrapping approach".
The most reliable amongst them seems to be the one of rplantiko.
Such function wrapping easily can be abstracted away. The concept / pattern itself might be called "Method Modification". Its implementation definitely belongs to Function.prototype. It would be nice to be backed
one day by standard prototypal method modifiers like before, after, around, afterThrowing and afterFinally.
As for the aforementioned example by rplantiko ...
function a () { return 1; }
// redefine
a = (function () {
var _a = a;
return function () {
// You may reuse the original function ...
// Typical case: Conditionally use old/new behaviour
var originalResult = _a.apply(this, arguments);
// ... and modify the logic in any way
return originalResult + 1;
};
})();
console.log('a() ...', a()); // --> gives 2
.as-console-wrapper { min-height: 100%!important; top: 0; }
... and making use of around, the code would transform to ...
function a () { return 1; }
console.log('original a ...', a);
console.log('a() ...', a()); // 1
a = a.around(function (proceed, handler, args) {
return (proceed() + 1);
});
console.log('\nmodified a ...', a);
console.log('a() ...', a()); // 2
.as-console-wrapper { min-height: 100%!important; top: 0; }
<script>
(function(d){function f(a){return typeof a==e&&typeof a.call==e&&typeof a.apply==e}function g(a,b){b=null!=b&&b||null;var c=this;return f(a)&&f(c)&&function(){return a.call(b||null!=this&&this||null,c,a,arguments)}||c}var e=typeof d;Object.defineProperty(d.prototype,"around",{configurable:!0,writable:!0,value:g});Object.defineProperty(d,"around",{configurable:!0,writable:!0,value:function(a,b,c){return g.call(a,b,c)}})})(Function);
</script>
This is a Clear Example based on a control timepicker eworld.ui
www.eworldui.net
Having a TimePicker eworld.ui where JavaScript is unreachable from outside, you can't find any js related to those controls. So how can you add a onchange event to the timepicker ?
There is a js function called when you Select a time between all the options that the control offer you. This function is: TimePicker_Up_SelectTime
First you have to copy the code inside this function.
Evaluate...quikwatch...TimePicker_Up_SelectTime.toString()
function TimePicker_Up_SelectTime(tbName, lblName, divName, selTime, enableHide, postbackFunc, customFunc) {
document.getElementById(tbName).value = selTime;
if(lblName != '')
document.getElementById(lblName).innerHTML = selTime;
document.getElementById(divName).style.visibility = 'hidden';
if(enableHide)
TimePicker_Up_ShowHideDDL('visible');
if(customFunc != "")
eval(customFunc + "('" + selTime + "', '" + tbName + "');");
eval(postbackFunc + "();");
}
Now
Using the code that you have saved before reassign the same source code but add whatever you want..
TimePicker_Up_SelectTime = function (tbName, lblName, divName, selTime, enableHide, postbackFunc, customFunc) {
document.getElementById(tbName).value = selTime;
if (lblName != '')
document.getElementById(lblName).innerHTML = selTime;
document.getElementById(divName).style.visibility = 'hidden';
if (enableHide)
TimePicker_Up_ShowHideDDL('visible');
if (customFunc != "")
eval(customFunc + "('" + selTime + "', '" + tbName + "');");
eval(postbackFunc + "();");
>>>>>>> My function >>>>> RaiseChange(tbName);
}
I've added My Function to the function so now I can simulate an onchange event when I select a time.
RaiseChange(...) could be whatever you want.
If you're debugging javascript and want to see how changes to the code affects the page, you can use this Firefox extension to view/alter javascripts:
Execute JS firefox extension:
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/1729
You can change functions like other objects
var a1 = function(){return 1;}
var b1 = a1;
a1 = function(){
return b1() + 1;
};
console.log(a1()); // return 2
// OR:
function a2(){return 1;}
var b2 = a2;
a2 = function(){
return b2() + 1;
};
console.log(a2()); // return 2
Can you not just define it again later on? When you want the change try just redefining it as:
a = function() { return 2; }
const createFunction = function (defaultRealization) {
let realization = defaultRealization;
const youFunction = function (...args) {
return realization(...args);
};
youFunction.alterRealization = function (fn) {
realization = fn;
};
return youFunction;
}
const myFunction = createFunction(function () { return 1; });
console.log(myFunction()); // 1
myFunction.alterRealization(function () { return 2; });
console.log(myFunction()); // 2
I'm writing a global error handling "module" for one of my applications.
One of the features I want to have is to be able to easily wrap a function with a try{} catch{} block, so that all calls to that function will automatically have the error handling code that'll call my global logging method. (To avoid polluting the code everywhere with try/catch blocks).
This is, however, slightly beyond my understanding of the low-level functioning of JavaScript, the .call and .apply methods, and the this keyword.
I wrote this code, based on Prototype's Function.wrap method:
Object.extend(Function.prototype, {
TryCatchWrap: function() {
var __method = this;
return function() {
try { __method.apply(this, arguments) } catch(ex) { ErrorHandler.Exception(ex); }
}
}
});
Which is used like this:
function DoSomething(a, b, c, d) {
document.write(a + b + c)
alert(1/e);
}
var fn2 = DoSomething.TryCatchWrap();
fn2(1, 2, 3, 4);
That code works perfectly. It prints out 6, and then calls my global error handler.
My question is: will this break something when the function I'm wrapping is within an object, and it uses the "this" operator? I'm slightly worried since I'm calling .apply, passing something there, I'm afraid this may break something.
Personally instead of polluting builtin objects I would go with a decorator technique:
var makeSafe = function(fn){
return function(){
try{
return fn.apply(this, arguments);
}catch(ex){
ErrorHandler.Exception(ex);
}
};
};
You can use it like that:
function fnOriginal(a){
console.log(1/a);
};
var fn2 = makeSafe(fnOriginal);
fn2(1);
fn2(0);
fn2("abracadabra!");
var obj = {
method1: function(x){ /* do something */ },
method2: function(x){ /* do something */ }
};
obj.safeMethod1 = makeSafe(obj.method1);
obj.method1(42); // the original method
obj.safeMethod1(42); // the "safe" method
// let's override a method completely
obj.method2 = makeSafe(obj.method2);
But if you do feel like modifying prototypes, you can write it like that:
Function.prototype.TryCatchWrap = function(){
var fn = this; // because we call it on the function itself
// let's copy the rest from makeSafe()
return function(){
try{
return fn.apply(this, arguments);
}catch(ex){
ErrorHandler.Exception(ex);
}
};
};
Obvious improvement will be to parameterize makeSafe() so you can specify what function to call in the catch block.
2017 answer: just use ES6. Given the following demo function:
function doThing(){
console.log(...arguments)
}
You can make your own wrapper function without needing external libraries:
function wrap(someFunction){
function wrappedFunction(){
var newArguments = [...arguments]
newArguments.push('SECRET EXTRA ARG ADDED BY WRAPPER!')
console.log(`You're about to run a function with these arguments: \n ${newArguments}`)
return someFunction(...newArguments)
}
return wrappedFunction
}
In use:
doThing('one', 'two', 'three')
Works as normal.
But using the new wrapped function:
const wrappedDoThing = wrap(doThing)
wrappedDoThing('one', 'two', 'three')
Returns:
one two three SECRET EXTRA ARG ADDED BY WRAPPER!
2016 answer: use the wrap module:
In the example below I'm wrapping process.exit(), but this works happily with any other function (including browser JS too).
var wrap = require('lodash.wrap');
var log = console.log.bind(console)
var RESTART_FLUSH_DELAY = 3 * 1000
process.exit = wrap(process.exit, function(originalFunction) {
log('Waiting', RESTART_FLUSH_DELAY, 'for buffers to flush before restarting')
setTimeout(originalFunction, RESTART_FLUSH_DELAY)
});
process.exit(1);
Object.extend(Function.prototype, {
Object.extend in the Google Chrome Console gives me 'undefined'
Well here's some working example:
Boolean.prototype.XOR =
// ^- Note that it's a captial 'B' and so
// you'll work on the Class and not the >b<oolean object
function( bool2 ) {
var bool1 = this.valueOf();
// 'this' refers to the actual object - and not to 'XOR'
return (bool1 == true && bool2 == false)
|| (bool1 == false && bool2 == true);
}
alert ( "true.XOR( false ) => " true.XOR( false ) );
so instead of
Object.extend(Function.prototype, {...})
Do it like:
Function.prototype.extend = {}
Function wrapping in good old fashion:
//Our function
function myFunction() {
//For example we do this:
document.getElementById('demo').innerHTML = Date();
return;
}
//Our wrapper - middleware
function wrapper(fn) {
try {
return function(){
console.info('We add something else', Date());
return fn();
}
}
catch (error) {
console.info('The error: ', error);
}
}
//We use wrapper - middleware
myFunction = wrapper(myFunction);
The same in ES6 style:
//Our function
let myFunction = () => {
//For example we do this:
document.getElementById('demo').innerHTML = Date();
return;
}
//Our wrapper - middleware
const wrapper = func => {
try {
return () => {
console.info('We add something else', Date());
return func();
}
}
catch (error) {
console.info('The error: ', error);
}
}
//We use wrapper - middleware
myFunction = wrapper(myFunction);
Here is an ES6 style:
const fnOriginal = (a, b, c, d) => {
console.log(a);
console.log(b);
console.log(c);
console.log(d);
return 'Return value from fnOriginal';
};
const wrapperFunction = fn => {
return function () {
try {
const returnValuFromOriginal = fn.apply(this, arguments);
console.log('Adding a new line from Wrapper :', returnValuFromOriginal);
} catch (ex) {
ErrorHandler.Exception(ex);
}
};
};
const fnWrapped = wrapperFunction(fnOriginal);
fnWrapped(1, 2, 3, 4);
The following wrapping utility takes a function and enables the developer to inject a code or wrap the original:
function wrap(originalFunction, { inject, wrapper } = {}) {
const wrapperFn = function(...args) {
if (typeof inject === 'function') {
inject(originalFunction, this);
}
if (typeof wrapper === 'function') {
return wrapper(originalFunction, this, args);
}
return originalFunction.apply(this, args);
};
// copy the original function's props onto the wrapper
for(const prop in originalFunction) {
if (originalFunction.hasOwnProperty(prop)) {
wrapperFn[prop] = originalFunction[prop];
}
}
return wrapperFn;
}
Usage example:
// create window.a()
(function() {
const txt = 'correctly'; // outer scope variable
window.a = function a(someText) { // our target
if (someText === "isn't") {
throw('omg');
}
return ['a', someText, window.a.c, txt].join(' ');
};
window.a.c = 'called'; // a.c property example
})();
const originalFunc = window.a;
console.log(originalFunc('is')); // logs "a is called correctly"
window.a = wrap(originalFunc);
console.log(a('is')); // logs "a is called correctly"
window.a = wrap(originalFunc, { inject(func, thisArg) { console.log('injected function'); }});
console.log(a('is')); // logs "injected function\na is called correctly"
window.a = wrap(originalFunc, { wrapper(func, thisArg, args) { console.log(`doing something else instead of ${func.name}(${args.join(', ')})`); }});
console.log(a('is')); // logs "doing something else instead of a(is)"
window.a = wrap(originalFunc, {
wrapper(func, thisArg, args) {
try {
return func.apply(thisArg, args);
} catch(err) {
console.error('got an exception');
}
}
});
a("isn't"); // error message: "got an exception"
The last example demonstrates how to wrap your function with a try-catch clause
As far as polluting the namespaces, I'm actually going to pollute them some more...
Since everything that happens in JS is initiated by an event of some kind, I'm planning to call my magical wrapper function from within the Prototype Event.observe() method, so I don't need to call it everywhere.
I do see the downsides of all this, of course, but this particular project is heavily tied to Prototype anyway, and I do want to have this error handler code be as global as possible, so it's not a big deal.
Thanks for your answer!