Develop Reference

Can you trap/identify if an object is being "invoked" as a function in runtime?

Given some basic class, such as a logical predicate class here:
const isACat = new Predicate(obj => obj.cat === true);
Is there a way to determine/trap/identify (perhaps via Reflection?) the context under which isACat is being "invoked/evaluated"? By "invoke/evaluate"--because I can't really think of a better word to use right now--I mean something like this:
console.log(isACat(object1)); // being "invoked/evaluated" as a function
console.log(isACat); // being "invoked/evaluated" as a non-function
I specifically mean this in the "runtime" sense, not in the typeof/instanceof sense.
For the ultimate goal of performing contingent behavior, such as (perhaps via a Proxy) returning a default function if that instance is being "invoked/evaluated" as a function.
Edit: Maybe in more precise terms, is there such a thing as a "default getter" when no further child prop is passed (i.e. isACat, but not isACat[ prop ])?

I am not seriously suggesting that you do any of the things presented bellow and you will spot their limitation immediately but I thought it was kind of fun to demonstrate.
[{dog: true}, {cat: true}].filter(isACat);// (referenced(), [{cat: true}])
isACat({dog: true}); // (referenced(), false)
let lives = 0;
lives += isACat; // (referenced(), 7)
`Felix ${isACat}` // (referenced(), "Felix is a cat")
The above requires the following, which you could probably generate with a Babel plugin or something (I mean: don't, obviously)
const referenced = (obj) => () => {
console.log(obj, 'was referenced');
return obj;
}
const _isACat = obj => obj.cat === true;
Object.defineProperty(_isACat, 'toString', {
value: () => 'is a cat'
});
Object.defineProperty(_isACat, 'valueOf', {
value: () => 7
});
Object.defineProperty(window, 'isACat', {
get: referenced(_isACat)
});
I don't know what I like the most about it: deceiving expectations thanks to getters, magical type coercion, or local variables leaking to the global scope. It is pure poetry.
More seriously, I don't think Javascript is the language for this but if for some reason you need meta-programming power, maybe give Clojure a go. You can also use macros with ClojureScript, which compiles to Javascript and has Javascript interop, but there is a runtime/compile time distinction which will limit what you can do.

No, there is no such thing. You're just accessing a variable, or whatever the reference to your object is stored in, and you get back a reference value. The object itself has no say about this process - it isn't even looked at yet. This is not "invocation" or "evaluation".
Really, if you need something like this, make the invocation explicit, and write isACat() (vs isACat(object) vs isACat.prop()).

Making a custom group of defined chaining methods in js

The question is related to general js programming, but I'll use nightwatch.js as an example to elaborate my query.
NightWatch JS provides various chaining methods for its browser components, like: -
browser
.setValue('input[name='email']','example#mail.com')
.setValue('input[name='password']', '123456')
.click('#submitButton')
But if I'm writing method to select an option from dropdown, it requires multiple steps, and if there are multiple dropdowns in a form, it gets really confusing, like: -
browser
.click(`#country`)
.waitForElementVisible(`#india`)
.click(`#india`)
.click(`#state`)
.waitForElementVisible(`#delhi`)
.click(`#delhi`)
Is it possible to create a custom chaining method to group these already defined methods? For example something like:
/* custom method */
const dropdownSelector = (id, value) {
return this
.click(`${id}`).
.waitForElementVisible(`${value}`)
.click(`${value}`)
}
/* So it can be used as a chaining method */
browser
.dropdownSelector('country', 'india')
.dropdownSelector('state', 'delhi')
Or is there any other way I can solve my problem of increasing reusability and readability of my code?

I'm somewhat new to JS so couldn't tell you an ideal code solution, would have to admit I don't know what a proxy is in this context. But in the world of Nightwatch and test-automation i'd normally wrap multiple steps I plan on reusing into a page object. Create a new file in a pageObject folder and fill it with the method you want to reuse
So your test...
browser
.click(`#country`)
.waitForElementVisible(`#india`)
.click(`#india`)
.click(`#state`)
.waitForElementVisible(`#delhi`)
.click(`#delhi`)
becomes a page object method in another file called 'myObject' like...
selectLocation(browser, country, state, city) {
browser
.click(`#country`) <== assume this never changes?
.waitForElementVisible(country)
.click(country)
.click(state)
.waitForElementVisible(city)
.click(city);
}
and then each of your tests inherit the method and define those values themselves, however you chose to manage that...
const myObject = require ('<path to the new pageObject file>')
module.exports = {
'someTest': function (browser) {
const country = 'something'
const state = 'something'
const city = 'something'
myObject.selectLocation(browser);
You can also set your country / state / city as variables in a globals file and set them as same for everything but I don't know how granular you want to be.
Hope that made some sense :)

This is a great place to use a Proxy. Given some class:
function Apple ()
{
this.eat = function ()
{
console.log("I was eaten!");
return this;
}
this.nomnom = function ()
{
console.log("Nom nom!");
return this;
}
}
And a set of "extension methods":
const appleExtensions =
{
eatAndNomnom ()
{
this.eat().nomnom();
return this;
}
}
We can create function which returns a Proxy to select which properties are retrieved from the extension object and which are retrieved from the originating object:
function makeExtendedTarget(target, extensions)
{
return new Proxy(target,
{
get (obj, prop)
{
if (prop in extensions)
{
return extensions[prop];
}
return obj[prop];
}
});
}
And we can use it like so:
let apple = makeExtendedTarget(new Apple(), appleExtensions);
apple
.eatAndNomnom()
.eat();
// => "I was eaten!"
// "Nom nom!"
// "I was eaten!"
Of course, this requires you to call makeExtendedTarget whenever you want to create a new Apple. However, I would consider this a plus, as it makes it abundantly clear you are created an extended object, and to expect to be able to call methods not normally available on the class API.
Of course, whether or not you should be doing this is an entirely different discussion!

How can I find where my object is being frozen?

I get this error:
Error: You attempted to set the key `TpDeF3wd6UoQ6BjEFmwz` with the value `{"seen":true}` on an object that is meant to be immutable and has been frozen.
How can I discover what code is directly/indirectly freezing my object and making it immutable?
I've solved the error in development by rewriting the logic completely, but I'd like to understand how to debug this type of error.

One idea it to replace Object.freeze with your own that logs the stack, and then calls the old freeze.
Below is an example, you can see it's at 30:8
The line numbers in this snippet don't line up, only because SO snippets will be adding some extra wrapper code, but in production this should give you the correct line no.
'use strict';
function DebugFreeze() {
const oldFree = Object.freeze;
Object.freeze = (...args) => {
console.log(new Error("Object Frozen").stack);
return oldFree.call(Object, ...args);
}
}
DebugFreeze();
const a = { one: 1 };
a.two = 2;
Object.freeze(a);
a.three = 3;
console.log("here");

Disabling console access for specific Javascript files

In my current project with lots of dependencies I need a way to disable console access for specific libraries so that those files can't use any of the console functionality.
I could of course disable console functionality by simply finding and replacing it in the library bundle, but as this project has a lot of dependencies that would make updating libraries a huge hassle.
I'm aware that I can disable console functionality by overwriting it with an empty function block:
console.log = function(){};
But that disables the console functionality for the entire project. So im looking for an implementation, or a line of code with which I can disable console functionality for a specific file or code block.

Write a white-listing "middleware" for console.log
// Preserve the old console.log
const log = console.log;
// Used a dictionary because it's faster than lists for lookups
const whiteListedFunctions = {"hello": true};
// Whitelisting "middleware". We used the function's name "funcName"
// as a criteria, but it's adaptable
const isWhitelisted = callerData => callerData.funcName in whiteListedFunctions;
// Replacing the default "console.log"
console.log = arg => {
const stack = new Error().stack.split("at")[2].trim().split(' ');
const fileParts = stack[1].substr(1, stack[1].length - 2).split(':');
const callerData = {
funcName: stack[0],
file: fileParts.slice(0, fileParts.length - 2).join(':'),
lineColNumber: fileParts.slice(fileParts.length - 2).join(':')
};
if (isWhitelisted(callerData)) { // Filtering happens here
log(arg);
}
};
// Define the calling functions
function hello() { console.log("hello"); }
function world() { console.log("world"); }
hello(); // => Prints hello
world(); // => Doesn't print anything
Method explanation
You can do this by creating a whitelist (or blacklist) that will contain your filtering criteria. For example it may contain the name of the functions that call console.log or maybe the file name, or even the line and column numbers.
After that you create your whitelisting "middleware". This will take the caller function data and decide if it can log stuff or not. This will be done based on the previously defined whitelist. You can choose your preferred criteria in this "middleware".
Then you actually replace console.log by overriding with your new logger. This logger will take as an argument the message to log (maybe multiple arguments?). In this function you also need to find the data relating to the caller function (which wanted to call console.log).
Once you have the caller data, you can then use your whitelisting middleware to decide if it can log stuff
Getting information about the caller function
This part is a little "hacky" (but it got the job done in this case). We basically create an Error and check its stack attribute like this new Error().stack. Which will give us this trace
Error
at console.log.arg [as log] (https://stacksnippets.net/js:25:7)
at hello (https://stacksnippets.net/js:41:11)
at https://stacksnippets.net/js:48:1
After processing (split, map, etc...) the trace we get the caller function data. For example here we have
The caller function's name: hello
The file name: https://stacksnippets.net/js
The line and column number: 41:11 (watch out for minifiers)
This bit was inspired by VLAZ's answer in How to disable console.log messages based on criteria from specific javascript source (method, file) or message contents, so make sure to check it out. Really good and thorough post.
Note
To make sense of the trace we can do new Error().stack.split("at")[INDEX].trim().split(' ') where INDEX is the position of the function call you want to target in the stack trace. So if you want to get a different "level" that the one used in this example, try changing INDEX

Just redefine the console to log over a condition, your condition of course will be a check over which library is accessing the function:
// Your condition, could be anything
let condition = true;
/* Redefine the console object changing only the log function with your new version and keeping all the other functionalities intact
*/
let console = (old => ({
...old,
log: text => { if (condition) old.log(text) }
}))(window.console)
// Redefine the old console
window.console = console;
console.log('hello!')
Hope it helped :)

Yes, you can disable console logs from files based on their path! Here's a solution:
// in ./loud-lib.js
module.exports = {
logsSomething: () => console.log('hello from loud-lib')
}
// in ./silent-lib.js
module.exports = {
logsSomething: () => console.log('hello from silent-lib')
}
// in ./index.js
const loud = require('./loud-lib');
const silent = require('./silent-lib');
// save console.log
const log = console.log;
// redefinition of console.log
console.log = (...params) => {
// define regexp for path of libraries that log too much
const loudLibs = [/loud-lib/];
// check if the paths logged in the stacktract match with at least one regexp
const tooLoud = !!loudLibs.find(reg => reg.test(new Error().stack));
// log only if the log is coming from a library that doesn't logs too much
if (!tooLoud) log(...params);
};
loud.logsSomething();
silent.logsSomething();
$ node ./index.js
hello from silent-lib
This is based on the fact that new Error() produces a stack trace that identifies from which file is the error coming from (recursively).
Based on this observation, you can define an array of regular expression that match the name of libraries you don't want to hear logs from. You can get really specific and creative with the re-definition of console.log, but I kept it simple.
However, be aware of this (especially when using Webpack): if you bundle all your JS assets into one single bundle.js, the stacktrace will always point to bundle.js, thus logging everything. You'll have to go further from my code, for example by using stack-source-map, but I don't have sufficient details on your project to deliver a solution. I hope the ideas above are sufficient for you.

Calling object functions with variables

I'm building a simple node.js websocket server and I want to be able to send a request from a client to the server and have it just take care of things (nothing that could cause harm). Ideally the client will pass the server an object with 2 variables, one of them for the object and the other for the specific function in that object to call. Something like this:
var callObject = {
'obj': 'testObject',
'func':'testFunc'
}
var testObject = {
func: function(){
alert('it worked');
}
}
// I would expect to be able to call it with sometihng like.
console.log( window[callObject.obj] );
console.log( window[callObject.obj][callObject.func] );
I tried calling it with global (since node.js doesn't uses it instead of a browsers window) but it won't work, it always tells me that it can't find callObject.func of undefined. If I call a console.log on callObject.obj it shows the objects variable, as a string, as expected. If run a console.log on the object itself I get the object back.
I'm guessing this is something rather simple, but my Google-fu has failed me.

My recommendation is to resist that pattern and not have client code pick any function to call. If you are not careful you have built yourself a nice large security hole. Especially if you are considering using eval.
Instead have a more explicit mapping between data sent by the client and server code. (Similar to what routes in express what give you).
You might have something like this
const commands = { doSomething() { ... } );
// Then you should be able to say:
let clientCommand = 'doSomething'; // from client
commands[clientCommand](param);
This should be pretty close to what you want to achieve.
Just make sure doSomething validates any parameters passed in.
For two levels of indirection:
const commandMap = { room: { join() { ...} }, chat: { add() { ... } }};
// note this is ES6 syntax
let clientCmd = 'room';
let clientFn = 'join';
commandMap[clientCmd][clientFn]();
I think you might just have to find the right place to put the command map. Show your web socket handler code.