Best approach to passing variables between multi-file Node.js modules? - javascript

I have a Node.js module that I have kept as a single file up to this point. It's getting rather large though and has a lot of functionality in it that might be better separated into other modules. For example, separating out logging initialization and functionality into it's own module.
My module has a lot of (I want to say "global" but not really) top-level variables that lots of different functions access, use and modify. If I separate out functionality into separate files/modules and require them into my primary module, what is the proper approach to passing those variables between the modules?
For example, with everything in one module/file, it's easy to do this:
const logger = (log, message) {........}
const makeRequestHandler = (url, filepath) {
....
logger.info('some message here')
....
}
So it's pretty easy to access top-level systems like the logger. But, if I decided to split my logger and makeRequestHandler into their own modules/files, how would I handle this?
let logger = require('./mylogger') // Custom module
let makeRequest = require('./makerequest') // Another custom module
makeRequest.handler(url, filepath, logger)
This would work, but it doesn't seem elegant or optimal. It would get even more weird if I have a lot of different variables that I needed to pass in:
makeRequest.handler(url, filepath, logger, profiler, reportingBuffer, compressionHandler)
I've also considered passing stuff into the modules when requiring:
let makeRequest = require('./makeRequest')(logger)
or better yet:
let makeRequest = require('./makeRequest')(this) // I can access all variables made in my primary/top-level module
Is there an approach here that is more proper and better/easier to maintain? Is the last one the best approach?

What about a global locator pattern or service locator/service provider pattern as pointed out in comments wherein you can have something like a service registry and include these services in any module you want to use them in.
Although I am not sure about being the best solution of all, but it is easier to implement and feels like a neater solution than passing in the this context around the modules.
//logger.js
const logger = (log, message) {........}
export logger
Now, in the app file is where you can initialize the logger and other service instances and register them in the global locator
let logger = require('./mylogger') // Custom module
init() {
//init and set the logger
global.logger = new logger();
...
}
And this is how you can use it in the code to makRequest
let logger = global.logger;
const makeRequestHandler = (url, filepath) {
....
logger.info('some message here')
....
}
What I feel is problem with these solutions :
//Solution 1 : As you pointed out yourself this can get messy when number of paramters increase and is not very readable or understandable.
let logger = require('./mylogger')
let makeRequest = require('./makerequest')
makeRequest.handler(url, filepath, logger)
//Solution 2 : Passing around the `this` context is never a good idea,for keeping sensitive data independent or scope isolation
let makeRequest = require('./makeRequest')(this)
note :
This article explains some aspects of this solution in detail for your consideration.
Also there are some npm modules which provide these features like Service Locator
. HTH

Related

Sinon stub a function defined in the same file

I have code along the lines of:
// example.js
export function doSomething() {
if (!testForConditionA()) {
return;
}
performATask();
}
export function testForConditionA() {
// tests for something and returns true/false
// let's say this function hits a service or a database and can't be run in tests
...
}
export function performATask() {
...
}
// example.test.js
import * as example from 'example';
it('validates performATask() runs when testForConditionA() is true', () => {
const testForConditionAStub = sinon.stub(example, 'testForConditionA').returns(true);
const performATaskSpy = sinon.stub(example, 'performATask');
example.doSomething();
expect(performATaskSpy.called).to.equal(true);
});
(I know, this is a contrived example, but I tried to keep it short)
I haven't found a way to mock testForConditionA() using Sinon.
I know there are work arounds, like
A) place everything that's in example.js into a class, and then the functions of the class can be stubbed.
B) move testForConditionA() (and other dependencies) out of example.js into a new file, and then use proxyquire
C) inject the dependencies into doSomething()
However, none of these options are viable - I'm working in a large codebase, and many files would need a rewrite & overhaul. I've searched on this topic, and I see several other posts, like this Stubbing method in same file using Sinon, but outside of refactoring code into a separate class (or a factory as one person suggested), or refactoring into a separate file and using proxyquire, I haven't found a solution. I've used other testing & mocking libraries before in the past, so it's surprising that Sinon isn't able to do this. Or is it? Any suggestions on how to go about stubbing a function without refactoring the code it's trying to test?
This bit from a very related answer (mine), shows why it is not really that surprising:
ES modules are not mutable by default, which means Sinon can't do zilch.
The EcmaScript spec dictates this, so the only current way to mutate the exports is for the runtime to not adhere to the spec. This is essentially what Jest does: it provides its own runtime, translates the import calls into equivalent CJS calls (require) calls and provides its own require implementation in that runtime that hooks into the loading process. The resulting "module" usually has mutable exports that you can overwrite (i.e. stub).
Jest does not support native (as in no transpilation/modification of source) ESM either. Track issues 4842 and 9430 for how complex this (requires changes to Node).
So, no, Sinon cannot do this on its own. It is only a stubbing library. It does not touch the runtime or do anything magic, as it must work regardless of environment.
Now back to your original issue: testing your module. The only way I see this happening is through some sort of dependency injection mechanism (which you touch upon in alternative C). You obviously have some (internal/external) state your module depends on, so that means you need a way to change that state from the outside or inject a test double (what you are trying).
One easy way is just to create a setter strictly meant for testing:
function callNetworkService(...args){
// do something slow or brittle
}
let _doTestForConditionA = callNetworkService;
export function __setDoTestForConditionA(fn){
_doTestForConditionA = fn;
}
export function __reset(){
_doTestForConditionA = callNetworkService;
}
export function testForConditionA(...args) {
return _doTestForConditionA(...args);
}
You would then test your module simply like this:
afterEach(() => {
example.__reset();
});
test('that my module calls the outside and return X', async () => {
const fake = sinon.fake.resolves({result: 42});
example.__setDoTestForConditionA(fake);
const pendingPromise = example.doSomething();
expect(fake.called).to.equal(true);
expect((await pendingPromise).result).toEqual(42);
});
Yes, you do modify your SUT to allow testing, but I have never found that all that offensive. The technique works regardless of framework (Jasmine, Mocha, Jest) or runtime (browser, Node, JVM) and reads fine.
Optionally injected dependencies
You do mention injecting the dependencies into the function actually depending on them, and that has some issues that would propagate all over the codebase.
I would like to challenge that a bit by showing a technique I have used a bit in the past. See this comment (by me) on the Sinon issue tracker: https://github.com/sinonjs/sinon/issues/831#issuecomment-198081263
I use this example to show how you can inject stubs in a constructor that none of the usual consumers of this constructor needs to care about. Does require that you use some kind of Object to not add additional parameters, of course.
/**
* Request proxy to intercept and cache outgoing http requests
*
* #param {Number} opts.maxAgeInSeconds how long a cached response should be valid before being refreshed
* #param {Number} opts.maxStaleInSeconds how long we are willing to use a stale cache in case of failing service requests
* #param {boolean} opts.useInMemCache default is false
* #param {Object} opts.stubs for dependency injection in unit tests
* #constructor
*/
function RequestCacher (opts) {
opts = opts || {};
this.maxAge = opts.maxAgeInSeconds || 60 * 60;
this.maxStale = opts.maxStaleInSeconds || 0;
this.useInMemCache = !!opts.useInMemCache;
this.useBasicToken = !!opts.useBasicToken;
this.useBearerToken = !!opts.useBearerToken;
if (!opts.stubs) {
opts.stubs = {};
}
this._redisCache = opts.stubs.redisCache || require('./redis-cache');
this._externalRequest = opts.stubs.externalRequest || require('../request-helpers/external-request-handler');
this._memCache = opts.stubs.memCache || SimpleMemCache.getSharedInstance();
}
(see the issue tracker for expanded comments)
There is nothing forcing anyone to provide stubs, but a test can provide them to override how the dependencies work.

Difference between require('module')() and const mod = require('module') mod() in node/express

I have two files: server.js and db.js
server.js looks as such:
...
const app = express();
app.use('/db', db());
app.listen(3000, () => {
console.log('Server started on port 3000')
});
...
and db.js as such:
...
function init() {
const db = require('express-pouchdb')(PouchDB, {
mode: 'minimumForPouchDB'
});
return db;
}
...
This works just fine, and I am able to reach the pouchdb http-api from my frontend. But before, I had const PouchDBExpress = require('pouchdb-express'); in the top of db.js, and the first line in init() looked like this; const db = PouchDBExpress(PouchDB, {. This gave an error in one of the internal files in pouchdb saying cannot set property query on req which only has getters (paraphrasing).
So this made me copy the exaples from pouchdb-servers GitHub examples which requires and invokes pouched-express directly, and everthing worked fine. Is there an explanation for this? I'm glad it works now, but I'm sort of confused as to what could cause this.
The only difference between:
require('module')()
and
const mod = require('module');
mod();
is that in the second case, you retain a reference to the module exports object (perhaps for other uses) whereas in the first one you do not.
Both cases load the module and then call the exported object as a function. But, if the module export has other properties or other methods that you need access to then, obviously, you need to retain a reference to it as in the second option.
For us to comment in more detail about the code scenario that you said did not work, you will have to show us that exact code scenario. Describing what is different in words rather than showing the actual code makes it too hard to follow and impossible to spot anything else you may have inadvertently done wrong to cause your problem.
In require('module')(), you don't retain a reference of the module imported.
While in const mod = require('module'); mod(), you retain a reference and can use the same reference later in your code.
This problem might be due to some other reason like -
Are you using a some another global instance of the db, and your code works in the given case as you are making a local instance
Some other code dependent scenario.
Please provide more details for the same

Where does AWS-SDK Javascript code find its includes? [duplicate]

I'm trying to get JavaScript to read/write to a PostgreSQL database. I found this project on GitHub. I was able to get the following sample code to run in Node.
var pg = require('pg'); //native libpq bindings = `var pg = require('pg').native`
var conString = "tcp://postgres:1234#localhost/postgres";
var client = new pg.Client(conString);
client.connect();
//queries are queued and executed one after another once the connection becomes available
client.query("CREATE TEMP TABLE beatles(name varchar(10), height integer, birthday timestamptz)");
client.query("INSERT INTO beatles(name, height, birthday) values($1, $2, $3)", ['Ringo', 67, new Date(1945, 11, 2)]);
client.query("INSERT INTO beatles(name, height, birthday) values($1, $2, $3)", ['John', 68, new Date(1944, 10, 13)]);
//queries can be executed either via text/parameter values passed as individual arguments
//or by passing an options object containing text, (optional) parameter values, and (optional) query name
client.query({
name: 'insert beatle',
text: "INSERT INTO beatles(name, height, birthday) values($1, $2, $3)",
values: ['George', 70, new Date(1946, 02, 14)]
});
//subsequent queries with the same name will be executed without re-parsing the query plan by postgres
client.query({
name: 'insert beatle',
values: ['Paul', 63, new Date(1945, 04, 03)]
});
var query = client.query("SELECT * FROM beatles WHERE name = $1", ['John']);
//can stream row results back 1 at a time
query.on('row', function(row) {
console.log(row);
console.log("Beatle name: %s", row.name); //Beatle name: John
console.log("Beatle birth year: %d", row.birthday.getYear()); //dates are returned as javascript dates
console.log("Beatle height: %d' %d\"", Math.floor(row.height/12), row.height%12); //integers are returned as javascript ints
});
//fired after last row is emitted
query.on('end', function() {
client.end();
});
Next I tried to make it run on a webpage, but nothing seemed to happen. I checked on the JavaScript console and it just says "require not defined".
So what is this "require"? Why does it work in Node but not in a webpage?
Also, before I got it to work in Node, I had to do npm install pg. What's that about? I looked in the directory and didn't find a file pg. Where did it put it, and how does JavaScript find it?
So what is this "require?"
require() is not part of the standard JavaScript API. But in Node.js, it's a built-in function with a special purpose: to load modules.
Modules are a way to split an application into separate files instead of having all of your application in one file. This concept is also present in other languages with minor differences in syntax and behavior, like C's include, Python's import, and so on.
One big difference between Node.js modules and browser JavaScript is how one script's code is accessed from another script's code.
In browser JavaScript, scripts are added via the <script> element. When they execute, they all have direct access to the global scope, a "shared space" among all scripts. Any script can freely define/modify/remove/call anything on the global scope.
In Node.js, each module has its own scope. A module cannot directly access things defined in another module unless it chooses to expose them. To expose things from a module, they must be assigned to exports or module.exports. For a module to access another module's exports or module.exports, it must use require().
In your code, var pg = require('pg'); loads the pg module, a PostgreSQL client for Node.js. This allows your code to access functionality of the PostgreSQL client's APIs via the pg variable.
Why does it work in node but not in a webpage?
require(), module.exports and exports are APIs of a module system that is specific to Node.js. Browsers do not implement this module system.
Also, before I got it to work in node, I had to do npm install pg. What's that about?
NPM is a package repository service that hosts published JavaScript modules. npm install is a command that lets you download packages from their repository.
Where did it put it, and how does Javascript find it?
The npm cli puts all the downloaded modules in a node_modules directory where you ran npm install. Node.js has very detailed documentation on how modules find other modules which includes finding a node_modules directory.
Alright, so let's first start with making the distinction between Javascript in a web browser, and Javascript on a server (CommonJS and Node).
Javascript is a language traditionally confined to a web browser with a limited global context defined mostly by what came to be known as the Document Object Model (DOM) level 0 (the Netscape Navigator Javascript API).
Server-side Javascript eliminates that restriction and allows Javascript to call into various pieces of native code (like the Postgres library) and open sockets.
Now require() is a special function call defined as part of the CommonJS spec. In node, it resolves libraries and modules in the Node search path, now usually defined as node_modules in the same directory (or the directory of the invoked javascript file) or the system-wide search path.
To try to answer the rest of your question, we need to use a proxy between the code running in the the browser and the database server.
Since we are discussing Node and you are already familiar with how to run a query from there, it would make sense to use Node as that proxy.
As a simple example, we're going to make a URL that returns a few facts about a Beatle, given a name, as JSON.
/* your connection code */
var express = require('express');
var app = express.createServer();
app.get('/beatles/:name', function(req, res) {
var name = req.params.name || '';
name = name.replace(/[^a-zA_Z]/, '');
if (!name.length) {
res.send({});
} else {
var query = client.query('SELECT * FROM BEATLES WHERE name =\''+name+'\' LIMIT 1');
var data = {};
query.on('row', function(row) {
data = row;
res.send(data);
});
};
});
app.listen(80, '127.0.0.1');
I noticed that whilst the other answers explained what require is and that it is used to load modules in Node they did not give a full reply on how to load node modules when working in the Browser.
It is quite simple to do. Install your module using npm as you describe, and the module itself will be located in a folder usually called node_modules.
Now the simplest way to load it into your app is to reference it from your html with a script tag which points at this directory. i.e if your node_modules directory is in the root of the project at the same level as your index.html you would write this in your index.html:
<script src="node_modules/ng"></script>
That whole script will now be loaded into the page - so you can access its variables and methods directly.
There are other approaches which are more widely used in larger projects, such as a module loader like require.js. Of the two, I have not used Require myself, but I think it is considered by many people the way to go.
It's used to load modules. Let's use a simple example.
In file circle_object.js:
var Circle = function (radius) {
this.radius = radius
}
Circle.PI = 3.14
Circle.prototype = {
area: function () {
return Circle.PI * this.radius * this.radius;
}
}
We can use this via require, like:
node> require('circle_object')
{}
node> Circle
{ [Function] PI: 3.14 }
node> var c = new Circle(3)
{ radius: 3 }
node> c.area()
The require() method is used to load and cache JavaScript modules. So, if you want to load a local, relative JavaScript module into a Node.js application, you can simply use the require() method.
Example:
var yourModule = require( "your_module_name" ); //.js file extension is optional
Necromancing.
IMHO, the existing answers leave much to be desired.
At first, it's very confusing.
You have a (nowhere defined) function "require", which is used to get modules.
And in said (CommonJS) modules, you can use require, exports and module, WITHOUT THEM EVER BEING DEFINED.
Not that it would be new that you could use undefined variables in JS, but you couldn't use an undefined function.
So it looks a little like magic at first.
But all magic is based on deception.
When you dig a little deeper, it turns out it is really quite simple:
Require is simply a (non-standard) function defined at global scope.
(global scope = window-object in browser, global-object in NodeJS).
Note that by default, the "require function" is only implemented in NodeJS, not in the browser.
Also, note that to add to the confusion, for the browser, there is RequireJS, which, despite the name containing the characters "require", RequireJS absolutely does NOT implement require/CommonJS - instead RequireJS implements AMD, which is something similar, but not the same (aka incompatible).
That last one is just one important thing you have to realize on your way to understanding require.
Now, as such, to answer the question "what is require", we "simply" need to know what this function does.
This is perhaps best explained with code.
Here's a simple implementation by Michele Nasti, the code you can find on his github page.
Let's call our minimalisc implementation of the require function "myRequire":
function myRequire(name)
{
console.log(`Evaluating file ${name}`);
if (!(name in myRequire.cache)) {
console.log(`${name} is not in cache; reading from disk`);
let code = fs.readFileSync(name, 'utf8');
let module = { exports: {} };
myRequire.cache[name] = module;
let wrapper = Function("require, exports, module", code);
wrapper(myRequire, module.exports, module);
}
console.log(`${name} is in cache. Returning it...`);
return myRequire.cache[name].exports;
}
myRequire.cache = Object.create(null);
window.require = myRequire;
const stuff = window.require('./main.js');
console.log(stuff);
Now you notice, the object "fs" is used here.
For simplicity's sake, Michele just imported the NodeJS fs module:
const fs = require('fs');
Which wouldn't be necessary.
So in the browser, you could make a simple implementation of require with a SYNCHRONOUS XmlHttpRequest:
const fs = {
file: `
// module.exports = \"Hello World\";
module.exports = function(){ return 5*3;};
`
, getFile(fileName: string, encoding: string): string
{
// https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/XMLHttpRequest/Synchronous_and_Asynchronous_Requests
let client = new XMLHttpRequest();
// client.setRequestHeader("Content-Type", "text/plain;charset=UTF-8");
// open(method, url, async)
client.open("GET", fileName, false);
client.send();
if (client.status === 200)
return client.responseText;
return null;
}
, readFileSync: function (fileName: string, encoding: string): string
{
// this.getFile(fileName, encoding);
return this.file; // Example, getFile would fetch this file
}
};
Basically, what require thus does, is it downloads a JavaScript-file, evals it in an anonymous namespace (aka Function), with the parameters "require", "exports" and "module", and returns the exports, meaning an object's public functions and properties.
Note that this evaluation is recursive: you require files, which themselfs can require files.
This way, all "global" variables used in your module are variables in the require-wrapper-function namespace, and don't pollute the global scope with unwanted variables.
Also, this way, you can reuse code without depending on namespaces, so you get "modularity" in JavaScript. "modularity" in quotes, because this is not exactly true, though, because you can still write window.bla/global.bla, and hence still pollute the global scope... Also, this establishes a separation between private and public functions, the public functions being the exports.
Now instead of saying
module.exports = function(){ return 5*3;};
You can also say:
function privateSomething()
{
return 42:
}
function privateSomething2()
{
return 21:
}
module.exports = {
getRandomNumber: privateSomething
,getHalfRandomNumber: privateSomething2
};
and return an object.
Also, because your modules get evaluated in a function with parameters
"require", "exports" and "module", your modules can use the undeclared variables "require", "exports" and "module", which might be startling at first. The require parameter there is of course a pointer to the require function saved into a variable.
Cool, right ?
Seen this way, require looses its magic, and becomes simple.
Now, the real require-function will do a few more checks and quirks, of course, but this is the essence of what that boils down to.
Also, in 2020, you should use the ECMA implementations instead of require:
import defaultExport from "module-name";
import * as name from "module-name";
import { export1 } from "module-name";
import { export1 as alias1 } from "module-name";
import { export1 , export2 } from "module-name";
import { foo , bar } from "module-name/path/to/specific/un-exported/file";
import { export1 , export2 as alias2 , [...] } from "module-name";
import defaultExport, { export1 [ , [...] ] } from "module-name";
import defaultExport, * as name from "module-name";
import "module-name";
And if you need a dynamic non-static import (e.g. load a polyfill based on browser-type), there is the ECMA-import function/keyword:
var promise = import("module-name");
note that import is not synchronous like require.
Instead, import is a promise, so
var something = require("something");
becomes
var something = await import("something");
because import returns a promise (asynchronous).
So basically, unlike require, import replaces fs.readFileSync with fs.readFileAsync.
async readFileAsync(fileName, encoding)
{
const textDecoder = new TextDecoder(encoding);
// textDecoder.ignoreBOM = true;
const response = await fetch(fileName);
console.log(response.ok);
console.log(response.status);
console.log(response.statusText);
// let json = await response.json();
// let txt = await response.text();
// let blo:Blob = response.blob();
// let ab:ArrayBuffer = await response.arrayBuffer();
// let fd = await response.formData()
// Read file almost by line
// https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/ReadableStreamDefaultReader/read#Example_2_-_handling_text_line_by_line
let buffer = await response.arrayBuffer();
let file = textDecoder.decode(buffer);
return file;
} // End Function readFileAsync
This of course requires the import-function to be async as well.
"use strict";
async function myRequireAsync(name) {
console.log(`Evaluating file ${name}`);
if (!(name in myRequireAsync.cache)) {
console.log(`${name} is not in cache; reading from disk`);
let code = await fs.readFileAsync(name, 'utf8');
let module = { exports: {} };
myRequireAsync.cache[name] = module;
let wrapper = Function("asyncRequire, exports, module", code);
await wrapper(myRequireAsync, module.exports, module);
}
console.log(`${name} is in cache. Returning it...`);
return myRequireAsync.cache[name].exports;
}
myRequireAsync.cache = Object.create(null);
window.asyncRequire = myRequireAsync;
async () => {
const asyncStuff = await window.asyncRequire('./main.js');
console.log(asyncStuff);
};
Even better, right ?
Well yea, except that there is no ECMA-way to dynamically import synchronously (without promise).
Now, to understand the repercussions, you absolutely might want to read up on promises/async-await here, if you don't know what that is.
But very simply put, if a function returns a promise, it can be "awaited":
"use strict";
function sleep(interval)
{
return new Promise(
function (resolve, reject)
{
let wait = setTimeout(function () {
clearTimeout(wait);
//reject(new Error(`Promise timed out ! (timeout = ${timeout})`));
resolve();
}, interval);
});
}
The promise would then normally be used like this:
function testSleep()
{
sleep(3000).then(function ()
{
console.log("Waited for 3 seconds");
});
}
But when you return a promise, you can also use await, which means we get rid of the callback (sort of - actually, it is being replaced with a state-machine in the compiler/interpreter).
This way, we make asynchronous code feel like synchronous, so we now can use try-catch for error-handling.
Note that if you want to use await in a function, that function must be declared async (hence async-await).
async function testSleep()
{
await sleep(5000);
console.log("i waited 5 seconds");
}
And also please note that in JavaScript, there is no way to call an async function (blockingly) from a synchronous one (the ones you know). So if you want to use await (aka ECMA-import), all your code needs to be async, which most likely is a problem, if everything isn't already async...
An example of where this simplified implementation of require fails, is when you require a file that is not valid JavaScript, e.g. when you require css, html, txt, svg and images or other binary files.
And it's easy to see why:
If you e.g. put HTML into a JavaScript function body, you of course rightfully get
SyntaxError: Unexpected token '<'
because of Function("bla", "<doctype...")
Now, if you wanted to extend this to for example include non-modules, you could just check the downloaded file-contents for code.indexOf("module.exports") == -1, and then e.g. eval("jquery content") instead of Func (which works fine as long as you're in the browser). Since downloads with Fetch/XmlHttpRequests are subject to the same-origin-policy, and integrity is ensured by SSL/TLS, the use of eval here is rather harmless, provided you checked the JS files before you added them to your site, but that much should be standard-operating-procedure.
Note that there are several implementations of require-like functionality:
the CommonJS (CJS) format, used in Node.js, uses a require function and module.exports to define dependencies and modules. The npm ecosystem is built upon this format. (this is what is implemented above)
the Asynchronous Module Definition (AMD) format, used in browsers, uses a define function to define modules. (basically, this is overcomplicated archaic crap that you wouldn't ever want to use). Also, AMD is the format that is implemented by RequireJS (note that despite the name containing the characters "require", AMD absolutely is NOT CommonJS).
the ES Module (ESM) format. As of ES6 (ES2015), JavaScript supports a native module format. It uses an export keyword to export a module’s public API and an import keyword to import it. This is the one you should use if you don't give a flying f*ck about archaic browsers, such as Safari and IE/EdgeHTML.
the System.register format, designed to support ES6 modules within ES5. (the one you should use, if you need support for older browsers (Safari & IE & old versions of Chrome on mobile phones/tablets), because it can load all formats [for some, plugins are required], can handle cyclic-dependencies, and CSS and HTML - don't define your modules as system.register, though - the format is rather complicated, and remember, it can read the other easier formats)
the Universal Module Definition (UMD) format, compatible to all the above mentioned formats (except ECMA), used both in the browser and in Node.js. It’s especially useful if you write modules that can be used in both NodeJS and the browser. It's somewhat flawed, as it doesn't support the latest ECMA modules, though (maybe this will get fixed) - use System.register instead.
Important sidenote on the function argument "exports":
JavaScript uses call-by-value-sharing - meaning objects are passed as a pointer, but the pointer-value itselfs is passed BY VALUE, not by reference. So you can't override exports by assigning it a new object. Instead, if you want to override exports, you need to assign the new object to module.exports - because hey, module is the pointer passed by value, but exports in module.exports is the reference to the original exports pointer.
Important sidenote on module-Scope:
Modules are evaluated ONCE, and then cached by require.
That means all your modules have a Singleton scope.
If you want a non-singleton scope, you have to do something like:
var x = require("foo.js").createInstance();
or simply
var x = require("foo.js")();
with appropriate code returned by your module.
If you need CommonJS-support for the browser (IE5+, Chrome, Firefox),
check out my code in my comment on Michele Nasti's project
You know how when you are running JavaScript in the browser, you have access to variables like "window" or Math? You do not have to declare these variables, they have been written for you to use whenever you want.
Well, when you are running a file in the Node.js environment, there is a variable that you can use. It is called "module" It is an object. It has a property called "exports." And it works like this:
In a file that we will name example.js, you write:
example.js
module.exports = "some code";
Now, you want this string "some code" in another file.
We will name the other file otherFile.js
In this file, you write:
otherFile.js
let str = require('./example.js')
That require() statement goes to the file that you put inside of it, finds whatever data is stored on the module.exports property. The let str = ... part of your code means that whatever that require statement returns is stored to the str variable.
So, in this example, the end-result is that in otherFile.js you now have this:
let string = "some code";
or -
let str = ('./example.js').module.exports
Note:
the file-name that is written inside of the require statement: If it is a local file, it should be the file-path to example.js. Also, the .js extension is added by default, so I didn't have to write it.
You do something similar when requiring node.js libraries, such as Express. In the express.js file, there is an object named 'module', with a property named 'exports'.
So, it looks something like along these lines, under the hood (I am somewhat of a beginner so some of these details might not be exact, but it's to show the concept:
express.js
module.exports = function() {
//It returns an object with all of the server methods
return {
listen: function(port){},
get: function(route, function(req, res){}){}
}
}
If you are requiring a module, it looks like this:
const moduleName = require("module-name");
If you are requiring a local file, it looks like this:
const localFile = require("./path/to/local-file");
(notice the ./ at the beginning of the file name)
Also note that by default, the export is an object .. eg module.exports = {} So, you can write module.exports.myfunction = () => {} before assigning a value to the module.exports. But you can also replace the object by writing module.exports = "I am not an object anymore."
Two flavours of module.exports / require:
(see here)
Flavour 1
export file (misc.js):
var x = 5;
var addX = function(value) {
return value + x;
};
module.exports.x = x;
module.exports.addX = addX;
other file:
var misc = require('./misc');
console.log("Adding %d to 10 gives us %d", misc.x, misc.addX(10));
Flavour 2
export file (user.js):
var User = function(name, email) {
this.name = name;
this.email = email;
};
module.exports = User;
other file:
var user = require('./user');
var u = new user();

Can I export/require a module in Node.js to be used without a var holding its objects?

I am creating my own error library to have a custom catalog of specific and well documented errors to return on my API. I am doing something like this:
module.exports = CError;
function CError () {
}
// CUSTOM ERROR TYPES
CError.EmptyParamError = createErrorType(...);
CError.InvalidFormatError = createErrorType(...);
A sample of how I use my custom error types right now:
CError = require('cerror');
if(!passwd)
callback(new CError.EmptyParamError(passwd, ...));
I will use this errors through my entire project and I wish to have a cleaner code like this: (without the CError reference)
if(!passwd)
callback(new EmptyParamError(passwd, ...);
Is there a way to export the module or to require it that allows me to do this?
I googled without finding any answer, I also checked all this interface design patterns for Node.js modules but no one applies.
You can set it as a global, though as always when using globals, beware of the side-effects.
EmptyParamError = createErrorType(...);
That's it. Just leave off the var keyword, and don't set it as a property.
If it's only one or two types, you can skip the CError variable like this:
var EmptyParamError = require('cerror').EmptyParamError;
if(!passwd)
callback(new EmptyParamError(passwd, ...));
If you have multiple types in a single file, there will be multiple require('cerror') statements, but I believe there's no significant performance hit there because (if I understand correctly) Node will cache it the first time.

What is this JavaScript "require"?

I'm trying to get JavaScript to read/write to a PostgreSQL database. I found this project on GitHub. I was able to get the following sample code to run in Node.
var pg = require('pg'); //native libpq bindings = `var pg = require('pg').native`
var conString = "tcp://postgres:1234#localhost/postgres";
var client = new pg.Client(conString);
client.connect();
//queries are queued and executed one after another once the connection becomes available
client.query("CREATE TEMP TABLE beatles(name varchar(10), height integer, birthday timestamptz)");
client.query("INSERT INTO beatles(name, height, birthday) values($1, $2, $3)", ['Ringo', 67, new Date(1945, 11, 2)]);
client.query("INSERT INTO beatles(name, height, birthday) values($1, $2, $3)", ['John', 68, new Date(1944, 10, 13)]);
//queries can be executed either via text/parameter values passed as individual arguments
//or by passing an options object containing text, (optional) parameter values, and (optional) query name
client.query({
name: 'insert beatle',
text: "INSERT INTO beatles(name, height, birthday) values($1, $2, $3)",
values: ['George', 70, new Date(1946, 02, 14)]
});
//subsequent queries with the same name will be executed without re-parsing the query plan by postgres
client.query({
name: 'insert beatle',
values: ['Paul', 63, new Date(1945, 04, 03)]
});
var query = client.query("SELECT * FROM beatles WHERE name = $1", ['John']);
//can stream row results back 1 at a time
query.on('row', function(row) {
console.log(row);
console.log("Beatle name: %s", row.name); //Beatle name: John
console.log("Beatle birth year: %d", row.birthday.getYear()); //dates are returned as javascript dates
console.log("Beatle height: %d' %d\"", Math.floor(row.height/12), row.height%12); //integers are returned as javascript ints
});
//fired after last row is emitted
query.on('end', function() {
client.end();
});
Next I tried to make it run on a webpage, but nothing seemed to happen. I checked on the JavaScript console and it just says "require not defined".
So what is this "require"? Why does it work in Node but not in a webpage?
Also, before I got it to work in Node, I had to do npm install pg. What's that about? I looked in the directory and didn't find a file pg. Where did it put it, and how does JavaScript find it?
So what is this "require?"
require() is not part of the standard JavaScript API. But in Node.js, it's a built-in function with a special purpose: to load modules.
Modules are a way to split an application into separate files instead of having all of your application in one file. This concept is also present in other languages with minor differences in syntax and behavior, like C's include, Python's import, and so on.
One big difference between Node.js modules and browser JavaScript is how one script's code is accessed from another script's code.
In browser JavaScript, scripts are added via the <script> element. When they execute, they all have direct access to the global scope, a "shared space" among all scripts. Any script can freely define/modify/remove/call anything on the global scope.
In Node.js, each module has its own scope. A module cannot directly access things defined in another module unless it chooses to expose them. To expose things from a module, they must be assigned to exports or module.exports. For a module to access another module's exports or module.exports, it must use require().
In your code, var pg = require('pg'); loads the pg module, a PostgreSQL client for Node.js. This allows your code to access functionality of the PostgreSQL client's APIs via the pg variable.
Why does it work in node but not in a webpage?
require(), module.exports and exports are APIs of a module system that is specific to Node.js. Browsers do not implement this module system.
Also, before I got it to work in node, I had to do npm install pg. What's that about?
NPM is a package repository service that hosts published JavaScript modules. npm install is a command that lets you download packages from their repository.
Where did it put it, and how does Javascript find it?
The npm cli puts all the downloaded modules in a node_modules directory where you ran npm install. Node.js has very detailed documentation on how modules find other modules which includes finding a node_modules directory.
Alright, so let's first start with making the distinction between Javascript in a web browser, and Javascript on a server (CommonJS and Node).
Javascript is a language traditionally confined to a web browser with a limited global context defined mostly by what came to be known as the Document Object Model (DOM) level 0 (the Netscape Navigator Javascript API).
Server-side Javascript eliminates that restriction and allows Javascript to call into various pieces of native code (like the Postgres library) and open sockets.
Now require() is a special function call defined as part of the CommonJS spec. In node, it resolves libraries and modules in the Node search path, now usually defined as node_modules in the same directory (or the directory of the invoked javascript file) or the system-wide search path.
To try to answer the rest of your question, we need to use a proxy between the code running in the the browser and the database server.
Since we are discussing Node and you are already familiar with how to run a query from there, it would make sense to use Node as that proxy.
As a simple example, we're going to make a URL that returns a few facts about a Beatle, given a name, as JSON.
/* your connection code */
var express = require('express');
var app = express.createServer();
app.get('/beatles/:name', function(req, res) {
var name = req.params.name || '';
name = name.replace(/[^a-zA_Z]/, '');
if (!name.length) {
res.send({});
} else {
var query = client.query('SELECT * FROM BEATLES WHERE name =\''+name+'\' LIMIT 1');
var data = {};
query.on('row', function(row) {
data = row;
res.send(data);
});
};
});
app.listen(80, '127.0.0.1');
I noticed that whilst the other answers explained what require is and that it is used to load modules in Node they did not give a full reply on how to load node modules when working in the Browser.
It is quite simple to do. Install your module using npm as you describe, and the module itself will be located in a folder usually called node_modules.
Now the simplest way to load it into your app is to reference it from your html with a script tag which points at this directory. i.e if your node_modules directory is in the root of the project at the same level as your index.html you would write this in your index.html:
<script src="node_modules/ng"></script>
That whole script will now be loaded into the page - so you can access its variables and methods directly.
There are other approaches which are more widely used in larger projects, such as a module loader like require.js. Of the two, I have not used Require myself, but I think it is considered by many people the way to go.
It's used to load modules. Let's use a simple example.
In file circle_object.js:
var Circle = function (radius) {
this.radius = radius
}
Circle.PI = 3.14
Circle.prototype = {
area: function () {
return Circle.PI * this.radius * this.radius;
}
}
We can use this via require, like:
node> require('circle_object')
{}
node> Circle
{ [Function] PI: 3.14 }
node> var c = new Circle(3)
{ radius: 3 }
node> c.area()
The require() method is used to load and cache JavaScript modules. So, if you want to load a local, relative JavaScript module into a Node.js application, you can simply use the require() method.
Example:
var yourModule = require( "your_module_name" ); //.js file extension is optional
Necromancing.
IMHO, the existing answers leave much to be desired.
At first, it's very confusing.
You have a (nowhere defined) function "require", which is used to get modules.
And in said (CommonJS) modules, you can use require, exports and module, WITHOUT THEM EVER BEING DEFINED.
Not that it would be new that you could use undefined variables in JS, but you couldn't use an undefined function.
So it looks a little like magic at first.
But all magic is based on deception.
When you dig a little deeper, it turns out it is really quite simple:
Require is simply a (non-standard) function defined at global scope.
(global scope = window-object in browser, global-object in NodeJS).
Note that by default, the "require function" is only implemented in NodeJS, not in the browser.
Also, note that to add to the confusion, for the browser, there is RequireJS, which, despite the name containing the characters "require", RequireJS absolutely does NOT implement require/CommonJS - instead RequireJS implements AMD, which is something similar, but not the same (aka incompatible).
That last one is just one important thing you have to realize on your way to understanding require.
Now, as such, to answer the question "what is require", we "simply" need to know what this function does.
This is perhaps best explained with code.
Here's a simple implementation by Michele Nasti, the code you can find on his github page.
Let's call our minimalisc implementation of the require function "myRequire":
function myRequire(name)
{
console.log(`Evaluating file ${name}`);
if (!(name in myRequire.cache)) {
console.log(`${name} is not in cache; reading from disk`);
let code = fs.readFileSync(name, 'utf8');
let module = { exports: {} };
myRequire.cache[name] = module;
let wrapper = Function("require, exports, module", code);
wrapper(myRequire, module.exports, module);
}
console.log(`${name} is in cache. Returning it...`);
return myRequire.cache[name].exports;
}
myRequire.cache = Object.create(null);
window.require = myRequire;
const stuff = window.require('./main.js');
console.log(stuff);
Now you notice, the object "fs" is used here.
For simplicity's sake, Michele just imported the NodeJS fs module:
const fs = require('fs');
Which wouldn't be necessary.
So in the browser, you could make a simple implementation of require with a SYNCHRONOUS XmlHttpRequest:
const fs = {
file: `
// module.exports = \"Hello World\";
module.exports = function(){ return 5*3;};
`
, getFile(fileName: string, encoding: string): string
{
// https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/XMLHttpRequest/Synchronous_and_Asynchronous_Requests
let client = new XMLHttpRequest();
// client.setRequestHeader("Content-Type", "text/plain;charset=UTF-8");
// open(method, url, async)
client.open("GET", fileName, false);
client.send();
if (client.status === 200)
return client.responseText;
return null;
}
, readFileSync: function (fileName: string, encoding: string): string
{
// this.getFile(fileName, encoding);
return this.file; // Example, getFile would fetch this file
}
};
Basically, what require thus does, is it downloads a JavaScript-file, evals it in an anonymous namespace (aka Function), with the parameters "require", "exports" and "module", and returns the exports, meaning an object's public functions and properties.
Note that this evaluation is recursive: you require files, which themselfs can require files.
This way, all "global" variables used in your module are variables in the require-wrapper-function namespace, and don't pollute the global scope with unwanted variables.
Also, this way, you can reuse code without depending on namespaces, so you get "modularity" in JavaScript. "modularity" in quotes, because this is not exactly true, though, because you can still write window.bla/global.bla, and hence still pollute the global scope... Also, this establishes a separation between private and public functions, the public functions being the exports.
Now instead of saying
module.exports = function(){ return 5*3;};
You can also say:
function privateSomething()
{
return 42:
}
function privateSomething2()
{
return 21:
}
module.exports = {
getRandomNumber: privateSomething
,getHalfRandomNumber: privateSomething2
};
and return an object.
Also, because your modules get evaluated in a function with parameters
"require", "exports" and "module", your modules can use the undeclared variables "require", "exports" and "module", which might be startling at first. The require parameter there is of course a pointer to the require function saved into a variable.
Cool, right ?
Seen this way, require looses its magic, and becomes simple.
Now, the real require-function will do a few more checks and quirks, of course, but this is the essence of what that boils down to.
Also, in 2020, you should use the ECMA implementations instead of require:
import defaultExport from "module-name";
import * as name from "module-name";
import { export1 } from "module-name";
import { export1 as alias1 } from "module-name";
import { export1 , export2 } from "module-name";
import { foo , bar } from "module-name/path/to/specific/un-exported/file";
import { export1 , export2 as alias2 , [...] } from "module-name";
import defaultExport, { export1 [ , [...] ] } from "module-name";
import defaultExport, * as name from "module-name";
import "module-name";
And if you need a dynamic non-static import (e.g. load a polyfill based on browser-type), there is the ECMA-import function/keyword:
var promise = import("module-name");
note that import is not synchronous like require.
Instead, import is a promise, so
var something = require("something");
becomes
var something = await import("something");
because import returns a promise (asynchronous).
So basically, unlike require, import replaces fs.readFileSync with fs.readFileAsync.
async readFileAsync(fileName, encoding)
{
const textDecoder = new TextDecoder(encoding);
// textDecoder.ignoreBOM = true;
const response = await fetch(fileName);
console.log(response.ok);
console.log(response.status);
console.log(response.statusText);
// let json = await response.json();
// let txt = await response.text();
// let blo:Blob = response.blob();
// let ab:ArrayBuffer = await response.arrayBuffer();
// let fd = await response.formData()
// Read file almost by line
// https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/ReadableStreamDefaultReader/read#Example_2_-_handling_text_line_by_line
let buffer = await response.arrayBuffer();
let file = textDecoder.decode(buffer);
return file;
} // End Function readFileAsync
This of course requires the import-function to be async as well.
"use strict";
async function myRequireAsync(name) {
console.log(`Evaluating file ${name}`);
if (!(name in myRequireAsync.cache)) {
console.log(`${name} is not in cache; reading from disk`);
let code = await fs.readFileAsync(name, 'utf8');
let module = { exports: {} };
myRequireAsync.cache[name] = module;
let wrapper = Function("asyncRequire, exports, module", code);
await wrapper(myRequireAsync, module.exports, module);
}
console.log(`${name} is in cache. Returning it...`);
return myRequireAsync.cache[name].exports;
}
myRequireAsync.cache = Object.create(null);
window.asyncRequire = myRequireAsync;
async () => {
const asyncStuff = await window.asyncRequire('./main.js');
console.log(asyncStuff);
};
Even better, right ?
Well yea, except that there is no ECMA-way to dynamically import synchronously (without promise).
Now, to understand the repercussions, you absolutely might want to read up on promises/async-await here, if you don't know what that is.
But very simply put, if a function returns a promise, it can be "awaited":
"use strict";
function sleep(interval)
{
return new Promise(
function (resolve, reject)
{
let wait = setTimeout(function () {
clearTimeout(wait);
//reject(new Error(`Promise timed out ! (timeout = ${timeout})`));
resolve();
}, interval);
});
}
The promise would then normally be used like this:
function testSleep()
{
sleep(3000).then(function ()
{
console.log("Waited for 3 seconds");
});
}
But when you return a promise, you can also use await, which means we get rid of the callback (sort of - actually, it is being replaced with a state-machine in the compiler/interpreter).
This way, we make asynchronous code feel like synchronous, so we now can use try-catch for error-handling.
Note that if you want to use await in a function, that function must be declared async (hence async-await).
async function testSleep()
{
await sleep(5000);
console.log("i waited 5 seconds");
}
And also please note that in JavaScript, there is no way to call an async function (blockingly) from a synchronous one (the ones you know). So if you want to use await (aka ECMA-import), all your code needs to be async, which most likely is a problem, if everything isn't already async...
An example of where this simplified implementation of require fails, is when you require a file that is not valid JavaScript, e.g. when you require css, html, txt, svg and images or other binary files.
And it's easy to see why:
If you e.g. put HTML into a JavaScript function body, you of course rightfully get
SyntaxError: Unexpected token '<'
because of Function("bla", "<doctype...")
Now, if you wanted to extend this to for example include non-modules, you could just check the downloaded file-contents for code.indexOf("module.exports") == -1, and then e.g. eval("jquery content") instead of Func (which works fine as long as you're in the browser). Since downloads with Fetch/XmlHttpRequests are subject to the same-origin-policy, and integrity is ensured by SSL/TLS, the use of eval here is rather harmless, provided you checked the JS files before you added them to your site, but that much should be standard-operating-procedure.
Note that there are several implementations of require-like functionality:
the CommonJS (CJS) format, used in Node.js, uses a require function and module.exports to define dependencies and modules. The npm ecosystem is built upon this format. (this is what is implemented above)
the Asynchronous Module Definition (AMD) format, used in browsers, uses a define function to define modules. (basically, this is overcomplicated archaic crap that you wouldn't ever want to use). Also, AMD is the format that is implemented by RequireJS (note that despite the name containing the characters "require", AMD absolutely is NOT CommonJS).
the ES Module (ESM) format. As of ES6 (ES2015), JavaScript supports a native module format. It uses an export keyword to export a module’s public API and an import keyword to import it. This is the one you should use if you don't give a flying f*ck about archaic browsers, such as Safari and IE/EdgeHTML.
the System.register format, designed to support ES6 modules within ES5. (the one you should use, if you need support for older browsers (Safari & IE & old versions of Chrome on mobile phones/tablets), because it can load all formats [for some, plugins are required], can handle cyclic-dependencies, and CSS and HTML - don't define your modules as system.register, though - the format is rather complicated, and remember, it can read the other easier formats)
the Universal Module Definition (UMD) format, compatible to all the above mentioned formats (except ECMA), used both in the browser and in Node.js. It’s especially useful if you write modules that can be used in both NodeJS and the browser. It's somewhat flawed, as it doesn't support the latest ECMA modules, though (maybe this will get fixed) - use System.register instead.
Important sidenote on the function argument "exports":
JavaScript uses call-by-value-sharing - meaning objects are passed as a pointer, but the pointer-value itselfs is passed BY VALUE, not by reference. So you can't override exports by assigning it a new object. Instead, if you want to override exports, you need to assign the new object to module.exports - because hey, module is the pointer passed by value, but exports in module.exports is the reference to the original exports pointer.
Important sidenote on module-Scope:
Modules are evaluated ONCE, and then cached by require.
That means all your modules have a Singleton scope.
If you want a non-singleton scope, you have to do something like:
var x = require("foo.js").createInstance();
or simply
var x = require("foo.js")();
with appropriate code returned by your module.
If you need CommonJS-support for the browser (IE5+, Chrome, Firefox),
check out my code in my comment on Michele Nasti's project
You know how when you are running JavaScript in the browser, you have access to variables like "window" or Math? You do not have to declare these variables, they have been written for you to use whenever you want.
Well, when you are running a file in the Node.js environment, there is a variable that you can use. It is called "module" It is an object. It has a property called "exports." And it works like this:
In a file that we will name example.js, you write:
example.js
module.exports = "some code";
Now, you want this string "some code" in another file.
We will name the other file otherFile.js
In this file, you write:
otherFile.js
let str = require('./example.js')
That require() statement goes to the file that you put inside of it, finds whatever data is stored on the module.exports property. The let str = ... part of your code means that whatever that require statement returns is stored to the str variable.
So, in this example, the end-result is that in otherFile.js you now have this:
let string = "some code";
or -
let str = ('./example.js').module.exports
Note:
the file-name that is written inside of the require statement: If it is a local file, it should be the file-path to example.js. Also, the .js extension is added by default, so I didn't have to write it.
You do something similar when requiring node.js libraries, such as Express. In the express.js file, there is an object named 'module', with a property named 'exports'.
So, it looks something like along these lines, under the hood (I am somewhat of a beginner so some of these details might not be exact, but it's to show the concept:
express.js
module.exports = function() {
//It returns an object with all of the server methods
return {
listen: function(port){},
get: function(route, function(req, res){}){}
}
}
If you are requiring a module, it looks like this:
const moduleName = require("module-name");
If you are requiring a local file, it looks like this:
const localFile = require("./path/to/local-file");
(notice the ./ at the beginning of the file name)
Also note that by default, the export is an object .. eg module.exports = {} So, you can write module.exports.myfunction = () => {} before assigning a value to the module.exports. But you can also replace the object by writing module.exports = "I am not an object anymore."
Two flavours of module.exports / require:
(see here)
Flavour 1
export file (misc.js):
var x = 5;
var addX = function(value) {
return value + x;
};
module.exports.x = x;
module.exports.addX = addX;
other file:
var misc = require('./misc');
console.log("Adding %d to 10 gives us %d", misc.x, misc.addX(10));
Flavour 2
export file (user.js):
var User = function(name, email) {
this.name = name;
this.email = email;
};
module.exports = User;
other file:
var user = require('./user');
var u = new user();

Categories

Resources