Develop Reference

Node pattern I see, but do not understand why?

When going through so projects I have seen people do this pattern in module exports in this format:
var utils = require('../lib/bhalnhahaha');
module.exports = utils;
I am just not sure why they would not:
var whatever = require('../lib/bhalnhahaha');
require utils in the file instead of using the exports?

I can only think of two reasons for doing this:
var utils = require('../lib/bhalnhahaha');
// ... other code here
module.exports = utils;
You're augmenting or extending the utils object and adding your own additional methods to it and you want to export the augmented utils object.
There some side affect in the "other code here" that is somehow useful to whatever this module is doing and you want both that side affect (perhaps even initializing something in the utils object or doing something else in the local environment).
Otherwise, it's better to just let the caller import utils directly and not create an unnecessary dependency on your module.
A more specific answer can only be provided by showing us an actual example of code doing this and then we can see what it is actually doing that is of use.

Importing all exports in a module NodeJS

I want to be able to access all exports of a module without having to say module. before the export.
Let's say that I have a module:
// mymod.js
module.exports.foo = function() {
console.log("foo!");
}
module.exports.bar = "bar!";
And a main file:
// main.js
var mymod = require("./mymod.js");
mymod.foo();
Is there a way to call foo() without needing to say mymod. before? This can be achieved in python by saying import module as *.
What is the NodeJS equivalent to this?

In ES6 you can import modules in the following ways
import moduleName from "path/to/module"; // import default export from the file as moduleName object, moduleName can be anything
import { exportMemberName1, exportMemberName2, ... } from "path/to/module"; // destructured import, it will destructure import and can access the export module without prefixing anything
import * as moduleName from "path/to/module"; // import everything exported from the file as moduleName object, you can access every export members from that object, moduleName can be anything
These are the only methods provided by ES6 to import module (you can also use require).
If you have to import 100s of modules best ways is first method, import everything as an object and destructure on the go, I meant if you have lots of functions or methods, destructure what you want in that function in side that function, eg.
import * as moduleName from "path/to/file";
function function1(){
const { exportMember1, exportMember2 } = module;
}
function function2(){
const { exportMember1, exportMember5, exportMember7 } = module;
}

I want to be able to access all exports of a module without having to
say module. before the export.
Use the shorthand:
exports.myVar = myVar
exports.foo = () => {}
Or use an Object:
module.exports = {
foo,
myVar
}
// main.js
var mymod = require("./mymod.js");
mymod.foo();
Is there a way to call foo() without needing to say mymod. before?
This can be achieved in python by saying import module as *. What is
the NodeJS equivalent to this?
Use destructuring:
const { foo } = require("./mymod.js")
lets say that I have 100 exports in a file. Do I need to put commas
after every import inside the { }? There must be a better way to do
this
If you have 100 exports why would you want to import them all globally as their own functions? myMod.func is better for clarity.
A hacky workaround might be to do const myMod = require('myMod') then map it putting the functions on the global object. Or put them on the global from the start instead of exporting it.

You can use ES6 destructuring:
var { foo } = require("./mymod.js");
foo();

I have a situation where a I have a tiny-but-not-that-tiny generic utilities that is used along a couple of modules (all it's functions are used), in which there is a decent amount of modules already loaded. This functions are obviously named in a way you know there are a part of a generic utilities modules, so the "module.function" it's redundant, does not improve the readeability of the code. So, I prefered to mimick the "import * from module" of Python. Note that this is the first time I come across this situation, therefore, IMO, this mechanism, in almost every case, is not a good practice at all. The only way to do that, is iterating over the exports of the module, and adding the functions to the global object. I made a function to make the intention clear.
const importAll = () => {
return {
mod: null,
from(modName) {
this.mod = require(modName);
Object.keys(this.mod)
.forEach(exportedElementId => global[exportedElementId] = this.mod[exportedElementId]);
}
}
}
And it is used like this:
importAll().from('module-name');
Note that this only works if the module exports an object. Wont work if the module exports, for example, an array.

Here is another way, which may be a bit cleaner and more convenient in some cases: method importAll() is implemented inside export-heavy module, so it might be called immediately after require(), making this call very brief.
This works really well for large modules stuffed with simple standard functions and constants that are used across multiple projects.
Example:
// module.js
'use strict';
function func1() { return '4'; };
function func2() { return 2; };
function importAll() { delete this.importAll; Object.assign(global, this); };
module.exports = { func1, func2, importAll };
Then, in the main app, module can be unwrapped as follows:
// app.js
'use strict';
require('./module').importAll();
console.log("result: '%d'", func1() + func2());
There are few caveats though:
since properties/methods are added to global object, those might override some existing properties/methods, so be careful with naming.
those properties/methods will become available EVERYWHERE: in all modules, sub-modules, etc, so no need to call require() more than once.

JavaScript TypeError: contract is not a function [duplicate]

What is the purpose of Node.js module.exports and how do you use it?
I can't seem to find any information on this, but it appears to be a rather important part of Node.js as I often see it in source code.
According to the Node.js documentation:
module
A reference to the current
module. In particular module.exports
is the same as the exports object. See
src/node.js for more information.
But this doesn't really help.
What exactly does module.exports do, and what would a simple example be?

module.exports is the object that's actually returned as the result of a require call.
The exports variable is initially set to that same object (i.e. it's a shorthand "alias"), so in the module code you would usually write something like this:
let myFunc1 = function() { ... };
let myFunc2 = function() { ... };
exports.myFunc1 = myFunc1;
exports.myFunc2 = myFunc2;
to export (or "expose") the internally scoped functions myFunc1 and myFunc2.
And in the calling code you would use:
const m = require('./mymodule');
m.myFunc1();
where the last line shows how the result of require is (usually) just a plain object whose properties may be accessed.
NB: if you overwrite exports then it will no longer refer to module.exports. So if you wish to assign a new object (or a function reference) to exports then you should also assign that new object to module.exports
It's worth noting that the name added to the exports object does not have to be the same as the module's internally scoped name for the value that you're adding, so you could have:
let myVeryLongInternalName = function() { ... };
exports.shortName = myVeryLongInternalName;
// add other objects, functions, as required
followed by:
const m = require('./mymodule');
m.shortName(); // invokes module.myVeryLongInternalName

This has already been answered but I wanted to add some clarification...
You can use both exports and module.exports to import code into your application like this:
var mycode = require('./path/to/mycode');
The basic use case you'll see (e.g. in ExpressJS example code) is that you set properties on the exports object in a .js file that you then import using require()
So in a simple counting example, you could have:
(counter.js):
var count = 1;
exports.increment = function() {
count++;
};
exports.getCount = function() {
return count;
};
... then in your application (web.js, or really any other .js file):
var counting = require('./counter.js');
console.log(counting.getCount()); // 1
counting.increment();
console.log(counting.getCount()); // 2
In simple terms, you can think of required files as functions that return a single object, and you can add properties (strings, numbers, arrays, functions, anything) to the object that's returned by setting them on exports.
Sometimes you'll want the object returned from a require() call to be a function you can call, rather than just an object with properties. In that case you need to also set module.exports, like this:
(sayhello.js):
module.exports = exports = function() {
console.log("Hello World!");
};
(app.js):
var sayHello = require('./sayhello.js');
sayHello(); // "Hello World!"
The difference between exports and module.exports is explained better in this answer here.

Note that the NodeJS module mechanism is based on CommonJS modules which are supported in many other implementations like RequireJS, but also SproutCore, CouchDB, Wakanda, OrientDB, ArangoDB, RingoJS, TeaJS, SilkJS, curl.js, or even Adobe Photoshop (via PSLib).
You can find the full list of known implementations here.
Unless your module use node specific features or module, I highly encourage you then using exports instead of module.exports which is not part of the CommonJS standard, and then mostly not supported by other implementations.
Another NodeJS specific feature is when you assign a reference to a new object to exports instead of just adding properties and methods to it like in the last example provided by Jed Watson in this thread. I would personally discourage this practice as this breaks the circular reference support of the CommonJS modules mechanism. It is then not supported by all implementations and Jed example should then be written this way (or a similar one) to provide a more universal module:
(sayhello.js):
exports.run = function() {
console.log("Hello World!");
}
(app.js):
var sayHello = require('./sayhello');
sayHello.run(); // "Hello World!"
Or using ES6 features
(sayhello.js):
Object.assign(exports, {
// Put all your public API here
sayhello() {
console.log("Hello World!");
}
});
(app.js):
const { sayHello } = require('./sayhello');
sayHello(); // "Hello World!"
PS: It looks like Appcelerator also implements CommonJS modules, but without the circular reference support (see: Appcelerator and CommonJS modules (caching and circular references))

Some few things you must take care if you assign a reference to a new object to exports and /or modules.exports:
1. All properties/methods previously attached to the original exports or module.exports are of course lost because the exported object will now reference another new one
This one is obvious, but if you add an exported method at the beginning of an existing module, be sure the native exported object is not referencing another object at the end
exports.method1 = function () {}; // exposed to the original exported object
exports.method2 = function () {}; // exposed to the original exported object
module.exports.method3 = function () {}; // exposed with method1 & method2
var otherAPI = {
// some properties and/or methods
}
exports = otherAPI; // replace the original API (works also with module.exports)
2. In case one of exports or module.exports reference a new value, they don't reference to the same object any more
exports = function AConstructor() {}; // override the original exported object
exports.method2 = function () {}; // exposed to the new exported object
// method added to the original exports object which not exposed any more
module.exports.method3 = function () {};
3. Tricky consequence. If you change the reference to both exports and module.exports, hard to say which API is exposed (it looks like module.exports wins)
// override the original exported object
module.exports = function AConstructor() {};
// try to override the original exported object
// but module.exports will be exposed instead
exports = function AnotherConstructor() {};

the module.exports property or the exports object allows a module to select what should be shared with the application
I have a video on module_export available here

When dividing your program code over multiple files, module.exports is used to publish variables and functions to the consumer of a module. The require() call in your source file is replaced with corresponding module.exports loaded from the module.
Remember when writing modules
Module loads are cached, only initial call evaluates JavaScript.
It's possible to use local variables and functions inside a module, not everything needs to be exported.
The module.exports object is also available as exports shorthand. But when returning a sole function, always use module.exports.
According to: "Modules Part 2 - Writing modules".

the refer link is like this:
exports = module.exports = function(){
//....
}
the properties of exports or module.exports ,such as functions or variables , will be exposed outside
there is something you must pay more attention : don't override exports .
why ?
because exports just the reference of module.exports , you can add the properties onto the exports ,but if you override the exports , the reference link will be broken .
good example :
exports.name = 'william';
exports.getName = function(){
console.log(this.name);
}
bad example :
exports = 'william';
exports = function(){
//...
}
If you just want to exposed only one function or variable , like this:
// test.js
var name = 'william';
module.exports = function(){
console.log(name);
}
// index.js
var test = require('./test');
test();
this module only exposed one function and the property of name is private for the outside .

There are some default or existing modules in node.js when you download and install node.js like http, sys etc.
Since they are already in node.js, when we want to use these modules we basically do like import modules, but why? because they are already present in the node.js. Importing is like taking them from node.js and putting them into your program. And then using them.
Whereas Exports is exactly the opposite, you are creating the module you want, let's say the module addition.js and putting that module into the node.js, you do it by exporting it.
Before I write anything here, remember, module.exports.additionTwo is same as exports.additionTwo
Huh, so that's the reason, we do like
exports.additionTwo = function(x)
{return x+2;};
Be careful with the path
Lets say you have created an addition.js module,
exports.additionTwo = function(x){
return x + 2;
};
When you run this on your NODE.JS command prompt:
node
var run = require('addition.js');
This will error out saying
Error: Cannot find module addition.js
This is because the node.js process is unable the addition.js since we didn't mention the path. So, we have can set the path by using NODE_PATH
set NODE_PATH = path/to/your/additon.js
Now, this should run successfully without any errors!!
One more thing, you can also run the addition.js file by not setting the NODE_PATH, back to your nodejs command prompt:
node
var run = require('./addition.js');
Since we are providing the path here by saying it's in the current directory ./ this should also run successfully.

A module encapsulates related code into a single unit of code. When creating a module, this can be interpreted as moving all related functions into a file.
Suppose there is a file Hello.js which include two functions
sayHelloInEnglish = function() {
return "Hello";
};
sayHelloInSpanish = function() {
return "Hola";
};
We write a function only when utility of the code is more than one call.
Suppose we want to increase utility of the function to a different file say World.js,in this case exporting a file comes into picture which can be obtained by module.exports.
You can just export both the function by the code given below
var anyVariable={
sayHelloInEnglish = function() {
return "Hello";
};
sayHelloInSpanish = function() {
return "Hola";
};
}
module.export=anyVariable;
Now you just need to require the file name into World.js inorder to use those functions
var world= require("./hello.js");

The intent is:
Modular programming is a software design technique that emphasizes
separating the functionality of a program into independent,
interchangeable modules, such that each contains everything necessary
to execute only one aspect of the desired functionality.
Wikipedia
I imagine it becomes difficult to write a large programs without modular / reusable code. In nodejs we can create modular programs utilising module.exports defining what we expose and compose our program with require.
Try this example:
fileLog.js
function log(string) { require('fs').appendFileSync('log.txt',string); }
module.exports = log;
stdoutLog.js
function log(string) { console.log(string); }
module.exports = log;
program.js
const log = require('./stdoutLog.js')
log('hello world!');
execute
$ node program.js
hello world!
Now try swapping ./stdoutLog.js for ./fileLog.js.

What is the purpose of a module system?
It accomplishes the following things:
Keeps our files from bloating to really big sizes. Having files with e.g. 5000 lines of code in it are usually real hard to deal with during development.
Enforces separation of concerns. Having our code split up into multiple files allows us to have appropriate file names for every file. This way we can easily identify what every module does and where to find it (assuming we made a logical directory structure which is still your responsibility).
Having modules makes it easier to find certain parts of code which makes our code more maintainable.
How does it work?
NodejS uses the CommomJS module system which works in the following manner:
If a file wants to export something it has to declare it using module.export syntax
If a file wants to import something it has to declare it using require('file') syntax
Example:
test1.js
const test2 = require('./test2'); // returns the module.exports object of a file
test2.Func1(); // logs func1
test2.Func2(); // logs func2
test2.js
module.exports.Func1 = () => {console.log('func1')};
exports.Func2 = () => {console.log('func2')};
Other useful things to know:
Modules are getting cached. When you are loading the same module in 2 different files the module only has to be loaded once. The second time a require() is called on the same module the is pulled from the cache.
Modules are loaded in synchronous. This behavior is required, if it was asynchronous we couldn't access the object retrieved from require() right away.

ECMAScript modules - 2022
From Node 14.0 ECMAScript modules are no longer experimental and you can use them instead of classic Node's CommonJS modules.
ECMAScript modules are the official standard format to package JavaScript code for reuse. Modules are defined using a variety of import and export statements.
You can define an ES module that exports a function:
// my-fun.mjs
function myFun(num) {
// do something
}
export { myFun };
Then, you can import the exported function from my-fun.mjs:
// app.mjs
import { myFun } from './my-fun.mjs';
myFun();
.mjs is the default extension for Node.js ECMAScript modules.
But you can configure the default modules extension to lookup when resolving modules using the package.json "type" field, or the --input-type flag in the CLI.
Recent versions of Node.js fully supports both ECMAScript and CommonJS modules. Moreover, it provides interoperability between them.
module.exports
ECMAScript and CommonJS modules have many differences but the most relevant difference - to this question - is that there are no more requires, no more exports, no more module.exports
In most cases, the ES module import can be used to load CommonJS modules.
If needed, a require function can be constructed within an ES module using module.createRequire().
ECMAScript modules releases history
Release
Changes
v15.3.0, v14.17.0, v12.22.0
Stabilized modules implementation
v14.13.0, v12.20.0
Support for detection of CommonJS named exports
v14.0.0, v13.14.0, v12.20.0
Remove experimental modules warning
v13.2.0, v12.17.0
Loading ECMAScript modules no longer requires a command-line flag
v12.0.0
Add support for ES modules using .js file extension via package.json "type" field
v8.5.0
Added initial ES modules implementation
You can find all the changelogs in Node.js repository

let test = function() {
return "Hello world"
};
exports.test = test;

Unable to convert JavaScript injection pattern to TypeScript

We use a bespoke injection pattern in a rather large vanilla JavaScript application (more a framework with many consumers). The pattern allows us to be explicit about what dependencies each JS module takes. This is beneficial for two main reasons: it is easy to stub dependencies when unit testing a module and it allows our consumers to dynamically replace module implementations at runtime.
We have started migrating all of our modules over to TypeScript but have run into trouble converting a few modules that expose custom types. The problem is that TypeScript seems to want custom types to be exported immediately but we actually want to export the type after supplying the runtime dependencies via a function call (our dependency injection pattern).
So the question is how can we convert the following injection pattern to TypeScript without compromising the pattern itself?
module.exports = function ContextModule(logger) {
var log = logger.register('context');
function Context() {
log('creating type');
}
Context.prototype = {
doSomething: function() {
log('doing something');
}
}
Context.doSomethingStatic = function() {
log('doing something static');
}
return Context;
};
We return the custom type and can then new it up when we need to. For example, we might compose the above highly contrived module in a main.js as follows:
var loggerModule = require('LoggerModule.js');
var contextModule = require('ContextModule.js');
logger = loggerModule();
var Context = contextModule(logger);
// then we might use the Context type
var context = new Context();
context.doSomething(); // instance method
Context.doSomethingStatic(); // static method
Note the following:
the logger module is injected into the context module
the logger module methods are then used in the ContextModule function directly or in the "class" implementation it is defining
we use CommonJs to "require in" the module files and browserify to combine them

So the question is how can we convert the following injection pattern to TypeScript without compromising the pattern itself
You can definitely use it as it is (JavaScript is valid TypeScript). If you want safety, the process to convert the injection framework to TypeScript idioms is going to be more hard than just using one designed for it.
I highly recommend https://github.com/inversify/InversifyJS

Difference between require() and define() in RequireJS? [duplicate]

This question already has answers here:
When should I use require() and when to use define()?
(5 answers)
Closed 5 years ago.
In RequireJS, what is the basic difference between using require() Vs define();
require(['a'], function(a) {
// some code
});
// A.js
define(['b','c','d','e'], function() {
//some code
});
Any use cases would be very helpful..

One core difference that annoyed me in early use was figuring out that a define might never be called.
As long as there is only one define per file, it will register that module as available under that filename. However, define modules are only loaded once a require function asks for each of them.
Define: If you need a XXX, then load these other things first, then return the result of this function.
Require: Load these other things, then run this function. (no "if")
Example: Let's say you include this JS file in your page:
// this is in company/welcomepage.js
define(['company/ui_library'],
function(uiLib) {
console.log('Welcome to {company}!');
}
);
If that's the only Javascript file, you could open your page, and there would be nothing in the console log, in spite of the script telling it to welcome the user. However, that changes if somewhere in the page, or in another script, you insert the following:
require(['company/welcomepage'], function() {
// optionally insert some other page-initialization logic here
});
Now, the page will put a welcome message in the console when it loads.
In fact, with that second one in place, there would be no need to manually include welcomepage.js as a <script> tag; it would load it from its location as soon as it sees the require, and realizes it needs it.

require and requirejs are the same.
require === requirejs // true
require is a way to load a module which has been defined. For example to load the logger module I could do:
require(["logger"], function(logger){
logger.bla("S");
});
Here i am calling require, specifying an already defined module called logger and using it by calling its bla method.
define is a way to define a module. For example to define a logger module I could do:
// logger.js
define(function(){
return {
bla: function(x){
alert(x);
}
}
});
Here i called define and defined the logger module. in this module I returned the bla function i want to expose.
Sometimes define looks very similar to exports because define can also depend and use other modules just like require can use other modules. Let me show you the same logger module, this time using a module
// logger.js
define(["popup"], function(popup){
return {
bla: function(x){
popup.show(x);
}
}
});
Here the logger module I defined, also has a dependency called popup and thus it looks like require.

I believe you always use define for your module definitions. You have several flavours to do so, you can define a module with its dependencies in an array as the first argument to define (as in the example you posted).
Or you can use the Simplified CommonJS wrapper, something like this:
define(function (require) {
var otherModule = require('otherModule');
return function () {
return otherModule.operation();
};
});
Maybe you got mixed up with the JSONP service dependency format, which uses require() to load the service, and then specify define() as the JSONP callback which will eventually define the module once the service responds.
So in the end, you use define() to define modules, and require() to load them.

define is how we declare a module, in accordance with AMD module format(there are other available module formats like CommonJS, ES2015, System.register, UMD)
whereas ..
require is a module loading construct that's available with module loaders like RequireJs, SystemJS, Node's built-in module loader. It is used when you want to use a module defined in one of the above-stated module formats.

require() and define() both used to load dependencies.There is a major difference between these two method.
Its very Simple Guys
Require(): Method is used to run immediate functionalities.
define(): Method is used to define modules for use in multiple locations(reuse).