Develop Reference

Is it possible to change a reference that is passed into a function? [duplicate]

How do I pass variables by reference in JavaScript?
I have three variables that I want to perform several operations to, so I want to put them in a for loop and perform the operations to each one.
Pseudocode:
myArray = new Array(var1, var2, var3);
for (var x = 0; x < myArray.length; x++){
// Do stuff to the array
makePretty(myArray[x]);
}
// Now do stuff to the updated variables
What is the best way to do this?

There is no "pass by reference" available in JavaScript. You can pass an object (which is to say, you can pass-by-value a reference to an object) and then have a function modify the object contents:
function alterObject(obj) {
obj.foo = "goodbye";
}
var myObj = { foo: "hello world" };
alterObject(myObj);
alert(myObj.foo); // "goodbye" instead of "hello world"
You can iterate over the properties of an array with a numeric index and modify each cell of the array, if you want.
var arr = [1, 2, 3];
for (var i = 0; i < arr.length; i++) {
arr[i] = arr[i] + 1;
}
It's important to note that "pass-by-reference" is a very specific term. It does not mean simply that it's possible to pass a reference to a modifiable object. Instead, it means that it's possible to pass a simple variable in such a way as to allow a function to modify that value in the calling context. So:
function swap(a, b) {
var tmp = a;
a = b;
b = tmp; //assign tmp to b
}
var x = 1, y = 2;
swap(x, y);
alert("x is " + x + ", y is " + y); // "x is 1, y is 2"
In a language like C++, it's possible to do that because that language does (sort-of) have pass-by-reference.
edit — this recently (March 2015) blew up on Reddit again over a blog post similar to mine mentioned below, though in this case about Java. It occurred to me while reading the back-and-forth in the Reddit comments that a big part of the confusion stems from the unfortunate collision involving the word "reference". The terminology "pass by reference" and "pass by value" predates the concept of having "objects" to work with in programming languages. It's really not about objects at all; it's about function parameters, and specifically how function parameters are "connected" (or not) to the calling environment. In particular, note that in a true pass-by-reference language — one that does involve objects — one would still have the ability to modify object contents, and it would look pretty much exactly like it does in JavaScript. However, one would also be able to modify the object reference in the calling environment, and that's the key thing that you can't do in JavaScript. A pass-by-reference language would pass not the reference itself, but a reference to the reference.
edit — here is a blog post on the topic. (Note the comment to that post that explains that C++ doesn't really have pass-by-reference. That is true. What C++ does have, however, is the ability to create references to plain variables, either explicitly at the point of function invocation to create a pointer, or implicitly when calling functions whose argument type signature calls for that to be done. Those are the key things JavaScript doesn't support.)

Primitive type variables like strings and numbers are always passed by value.
Arrays and Objects are passed by reference or by value based on these conditions:
if you are setting the value of an object or array it is Pass by Value.
object1 = { prop: "car" };
array1 = [1,2,3];
if you are changing a property value of an object or array then it is Pass by Reference.
object1.prop = "car";
array1[0] = 9;
Code
function passVar(obj1, obj2, num) {
obj1.prop = "laptop"; // will CHANGE original
obj2 = { prop: "computer" }; //will NOT affect original
num = num + 1; // will NOT affect original
}
var object1 = {
prop: "car"
};
var object2 = {
prop: "bike"
};
var number1 = 10;
passVar(object1, object2, number1);
console.log(object1); // output: Object { prop: "laptop" }
console.log(object2); // output: Object { prop: "bike" }
console.log(number1); // ouput: 10

Workaround to pass variable like by reference:
var a = 1;
inc = function(variableName) {
window[variableName] += 1;
};
inc('a');
alert(a); // 2
And yup, actually you can do it without access a global variable:
inc = (function () {
var variableName = 0;
var init = function () {
variableName += 1;
alert(variableName);
}
return init;
})();
inc();

Simple Object
function foo(x) {
// Function with other context
// Modify `x` property, increasing the value
x.value++;
}
// Initialize `ref` as object
var ref = {
// The `value` is inside `ref` variable object
// The initial value is `1`
value: 1
};
// Call function with object value
foo(ref);
// Call function with object value again
foo(ref);
console.log(ref.value); // Prints "3"
Custom Object
Object rvar
/**
* Aux function to create by-references variables
*/
function rvar(name, value, context) {
// If `this` is a `rvar` instance
if (this instanceof rvar) {
// Inside `rvar` context...
// Internal object value
this.value = value;
// Object `name` property
Object.defineProperty(this, 'name', { value: name });
// Object `hasValue` property
Object.defineProperty(this, 'hasValue', {
get: function () {
// If the internal object value is not `undefined`
return this.value !== undefined;
}
});
// Copy value constructor for type-check
if ((value !== undefined) && (value !== null)) {
this.constructor = value.constructor;
}
// To String method
this.toString = function () {
// Convert the internal value to string
return this.value + '';
};
} else {
// Outside `rvar` context...
// Initialice `rvar` object
if (!rvar.refs) {
rvar.refs = {};
}
// Initialize context if it is not defined
if (!context) {
context = this;
}
// Store variable
rvar.refs[name] = new rvar(name, value, context);
// Define variable at context
Object.defineProperty(context, name, {
// Getter
get: function () { return rvar.refs[name]; },
// Setter
set: function (v) { rvar.refs[name].value = v; },
// Can be overrided?
configurable: true
});
// Return object reference
return context[name];
}
}
// Variable Declaration
// Declare `test_ref` variable
rvar('test_ref_1');
// Assign value `5`
test_ref_1 = 5;
// Or
test_ref_1.value = 5;
// Or declare and initialize with `5`:
rvar('test_ref_2', 5);
// ------------------------------
// Test Code
// Test Function
function Fn1(v) { v.value = 100; }
// Test
function test(fn) { console.log(fn.toString()); console.info(fn()); }
// Declare
rvar('test_ref_number');
// First assign
test_ref_number = 5;
test(() => test_ref_number.value === 5);
// Call function with reference
Fn1(test_ref_number);
test(() => test_ref_number.value === 100);
// Increase value
test_ref_number++;
test(() => test_ref_number.value === 101);
// Update value
test_ref_number = test_ref_number - 10;
test(() => test_ref_number.value === 91);

Yet another approach to pass any (local, primitive) variables by reference is by wrapping variable with closure "on the fly" by eval. This also works with "use strict". (Note: be aware that eval is not friendly to JavaScript optimizers, and also missing quotes around variable name may cause unpredictive results)
"use strict"
// Return text that will reference variable by name (by capturing that variable to closure)
function byRef(varName){
return "({get value(){return "+varName+";}, set value(v){"+varName+"=v;}})";
}
// Demo
// Assign argument by reference
function modifyArgument(argRef, multiplier){
argRef.value = argRef.value * multiplier;
}
(function(){
var x = 10;
alert("x before: " + x);
modifyArgument(eval(byRef("x")), 42);
alert("x after: " + x);
})()
Live sample: https://jsfiddle.net/t3k4403w/

There's actually a pretty sollution:
function updateArray(context, targetName, callback) {
context[targetName] = context[targetName].map(callback);
}
var myArray = ['a', 'b', 'c'];
updateArray(this, 'myArray', item => {return '_' + item});
console.log(myArray); //(3) ["_a", "_b", "_c"]

I personally dislike the "pass by reference" functionality offered by various programming languages. Perhaps that's because I am just discovering the concepts of functional programming, but I always get goosebumps when I see functions that cause side effects (like manipulating parameters passed by reference). I personally strongly embrace the "single responsibility" principle.
IMHO, a function should return just one result/value using the return keyword. Instead of modifying a parameter/argument, I would just return the modified parameter/argument value and leave any desired reassignments up to the calling code.
But sometimes (hopefully very rarely), it is necessary to return two or more result values from the same function. In that case, I would opt to include all those resulting values in a single structure or object. Again, processing any reassignments should be up to the calling code.
Example:
Suppose passing parameters would be supported by using a special keyword like 'ref' in the argument list. My code might look something like this:
//The Function
function doSomething(ref value) {
value = "Bar";
}
//The Calling Code
var value = "Foo";
doSomething(value);
console.log(value); //Bar
Instead, I would actually prefer to do something like this:
//The Function
function doSomething(value) {
value = "Bar";
return value;
}
//The Calling Code:
var value = "Foo";
value = doSomething(value); //Reassignment
console.log(value); //Bar
When I would need to write a function that returns multiple values, I would not use parameters passed by reference either. So I would avoid code like this:
//The Function
function doSomething(ref value) {
value = "Bar";
//Do other work
var otherValue = "Something else";
return otherValue;
}
//The Calling Code
var value = "Foo";
var otherValue = doSomething(value);
console.log(value); //Bar
console.log(otherValue); //Something else
Instead, I would actually prefer to return both new values inside an object, like this:
//The Function
function doSomething(value) {
value = "Bar";
//Do more work
var otherValue = "Something else";
return {
value: value,
otherValue: otherValue
};
}
//The Calling Code:
var value = "Foo";
var result = doSomething(value);
value = result.value; //Reassignment
console.log(value); //Bar
console.log(result.otherValue);
These code examples are quite simplified, but it roughly demonstrates how I personally would handle such stuff. It helps me to keep various responsibilities in the correct place.
Happy coding. :)

I've been playing around with syntax to do this sort of thing, but it requires some helpers that are a little unusual. It starts with not using 'var' at all, but a simple 'DECLARE' helper that creates a local variable and defines a scope for it via an anonymous callback. By controlling how variables are declared, we can choose to wrap them into objects so that they can always be passed by reference, essentially. This is similar to one of the Eduardo Cuomo's answer above, but the solution below does not require using strings as variable identifiers. Here's some minimal code to show the concept.
function Wrapper(val){
this.VAL = val;
}
Wrapper.prototype.toString = function(){
return this.VAL.toString();
}
function DECLARE(val, callback){
var valWrapped = new Wrapper(val);
callback(valWrapped);
}
function INC(ref){
if(ref && ref.hasOwnProperty('VAL')){
ref.VAL++;
}
else{
ref++;//or maybe throw here instead?
}
return ref;
}
DECLARE(5, function(five){ //consider this line the same as 'let five = 5'
console.log("five is now " + five);
INC(five); // increment
console.log("five is incremented to " + five);
});

Actually it is really easy. The problem is understanding that once passing classic arguments, you are scoped into another, read-only zone.
The solution is to pass the arguments using JavaScript's object-oriented design. It is the same as putting the arguments in a global/scoped variable, but better...
function action(){
/* Process this.arg, modification allowed */
}
action.arg = [["empty-array"], "some string", 0x100, "last argument"];
action();
You can also promise stuff up to enjoy the well-known chain:
Here is the whole thing, with promise-like structure
function action(){
/* Process this.arg, modification allowed */
this.arg = ["a", "b"];
}
action.setArg = function(){this.arg = arguments; return this;}
action.setArg(["empty-array"], "some string", 0x100, "last argument")()
Or better yet...
action.setArg(["empty-array"],"some string",0x100,"last argument").call()

JavaScript can modify array items inside a function (it is passed as a reference to the object/array).
function makeAllPretty(items) {
for (var x = 0; x < myArray.length; x++){
// Do stuff to the array
items[x] = makePretty(items[x]);
}
}
myArray = new Array(var1, var2, var3);
makeAllPretty(myArray);
Here's another example:
function inc(items) {
for (let i=0; i < items.length; i++) {
items[i]++;
}
}
let values = [1,2,3];
inc(values);
console.log(values);
// Prints [2,3,4]

Putting aside the pass-by-reference discussion, those still looking for a solution to the stated question could use:
const myArray = new Array(var1, var2, var3);
myArray.forEach(var => var = makePretty(var));

As we don't have javascript pass by reference functionality, the only way to do this is to make the function return the value and let the caller assign it:
So
"makePretty(myArray[x]);"
should be
"myArray[x] = makePretty(myArray[x]);"
This is in case you need assignment inside the function, if only mutation is necessary, then passing the object and mutating it should be enough

I know exactly what you mean. The same thing in Swift will be no problem. The bottom line is use let, not var.
The fact that primitives are passed by value, but the fact that the value of var i at the point of iteration is not copied into the anonymous function is quite surprising to say the least.
for (let i = 0; i < boxArray.length; i++) {
boxArray[i].onclick = function() { console.log(i) }; // Correctly prints the index
}

If you want to pass variables by reference, a better way to do that is by passing your arguments in an object and then start changing the value by using window:
window["varName"] = value;
Example:
// Variables with first values
var x = 1, b = 0, f = 15;
function asByReference (
argumentHasVars = {}, // Passing variables in object
newValues = []) // Pass new values in array
{
let VarsNames = [];
// Getting variables names one by one
for(let name in argumentHasVars)
VarsNames.push(name);
// Accessing variables by using window one by one
for(let i = 0; i < VarsNames.length; i += 1)
window[VarsNames[i]] = newValues[i]; // Set new value
}
console.log(x, b, f); // Output with first values
asByReference({x, b, f}, [5, 5, 5]); // Passing as by reference
console.log(x, b, f); // Output after changing values

I like to solve the lack of by reference in JavaScript like this example shows.
The essence of this is that you don't try to create a by reference. You instead use the return functionality and make it able to return multiple values. So there isn't any need to insert your values in arrays or objects.
var x = "First";
var y = "Second";
var z = "Third";
log('Before call:',x,y,z);
with (myFunc(x, y, z)) {x = a; y = b; z = c;} // <-- Way to call it
log('After call :',x,y,z);
function myFunc(a, b, c) {
a = "Changed first parameter";
b = "Changed second parameter";
c = "Changed third parameter";
return {a:a, b:b, c:c}; // <-- Return multiple values
}
function log(txt,p1,p2,p3) {
document.getElementById('msg').innerHTML += txt + '<br>' + p1 + '<br>' + p2 + '<br>' + p3 + '<br><br>'
}
<div id='msg'></div>

Using Destructuring here is an example where I have 3 variables, and on each I do the multiple operations:
If value is less than 0 then change to 0,
If greater than 255 then change to 1,
Otherwise dived the number by 255 to convert from a range of 0-255 to a range of 0-1.
let a = 52.4, b = -25.1, c = 534.5;
[a, b, c] = [a, b, c].map(n => n < 0 ? 0 : n > 255 ? 1 : n / 255);
console.log(a, b, c); // 0.20549019607843136 0 1

A function and an object at the same time?

Is it possible that after creating a function variable you can actually assign properties to it as if it's a regular object? This is what I did:
var example = function(a, b){
console.log(a, b);
}
example.someProperty = 'hi there';
Then I typed these lines in the browser console:
example('Hello', 'world') // Hello world
example.someProperty // hi there
So now basically the 'example' var acts as a function and as an object at the same time. This raised some questions for me, one of which is why, and another one - is there a way to do this by creating an object literal, because I can't think of such way.

So now basically the 'example' var acts as a function and as an object at the same time.
It doesn't act as a function and an object, it is a function and an object. Functions are objects in JavaScript.
This raised some questions for me, one of which is why
Fundamentally because that's what Eich decided to do in those 10 days in May 1995. Why he decided that is something only he can answer, but there have been many languages through the years that also see no reason to treat functions as something special and different. Presumably he was influenced by those. It's incredibly handy and flexible that functions are proper objects. For instance:
function foo() {
// ...
}
var f = foo;
I can use the variable f to refer to foo because foo is an object. In many languages, such as Java, it's a real pain to do that (though Java is a bit better now thanks to its recently-added lambdas).
Since functions are objects, they have a prototype, which means I can add features to all functions. For instance: I find it quite handy to be able to take a function and "bake in" (or "curry") arguments:
// A simple function
function foo(a, b) {
console.log("a is " + a);
console.log("b is " + b);
}
// Create a new one that, when called, will call the original passing in
// 1 as the first argument and then passing in any further arguments,
// preserving the `this` it was called with
var f = foo.curry(1);
// Call it
f(2); // "a is 1" / "b is 2"
Since JavaScript doesn't have a curry function (it has bind, which is similar, but interferes with this), I can add one:
var slice = Array.prototype.slice;
Object.defineProperty(Function.prototype, "curry", {
value: function() {
var f = this;
var args = slice.call(arguments);
return function() {
return f.apply(this, args.concat(slice.call(arguments)));
};
}
});
And voilà, now I can use curry on any function:
var slice = Array.prototype.slice;
Object.defineProperty(Function.prototype, "curry", {
value: function() {
var f = this;
var args = slice.call(arguments);
return function() {
return f.apply(this, args.concat(slice.call(arguments)));
};
}
});
// A simple function
function foo(a, b) {
snippet.log("a is " + a);
snippet.log("b is " + b);
}
// Create a new one that, when called, will call the original passing in
// 1 as the first argument and then passing in any further arguments,
// preserving the `this` it was called with
var f = foo.curry(1);
// Call it
f(2); // "a is 1" / "b is 2"
<!-- Script provides the `snippet` object, see http://meta.stackexchange.com/a/242144/134069 -->
<script src="//tjcrowder.github.io/simple-snippets-console/snippet.js"></script>
is there a way to do this by creating an object literal
No, the only way to create a function is to start out with a function. You can't take a non-function object and turn it into a function.

Functions are indeed objects in JavaScript. As any other object, they also have a prototype, that's where methods such as .call(), .apply() & .bind() come from.

javascript: Assign method and string to the same property name

I know I'm going to get the people who say I simply shouldn't do this, but I am curious how people accomplish it.
I know I've seen where you can type the name of a property and get one value, but then you add the parenthesis to the end and it accesses a method.
Visually, I'm saying this:
foo returns 'bar'
foo() performs a function
The question is how?

This isn't possible, due to how properties are resolved on objects. This is the only thing that comes remotely close:
function f() {
return 'I am being returned from the function.';
}
f.toString = function () {
return 'I am a property on the variable.';
}
console.log('f() says: ' + f());
console.log('f says: ' + f);
It relies on the fact that JS typecasts functions via the .toString method in certain scenarios.

No, but kind of...
This can kind of be done with valueOf
var foo = function() {
console.log("From Function");
return "Function";
};
foo.valueOf = function() {
return "Variable";
};
alert( 'Output is: ' + foo() )
alert( 'Output is: ' + foo )
This cannot be done with JavaScript because item in an object can be two different objects.
If you want a property to be a function and an object, that's different

Note, workaround utilizing setTimeout
var foo = (function() {
var fn = function() {
return foo && typeof foo === "string" ? function() {
return "foobar"
} : "bar";
};
setTimeout(function() {
foo = fn()
});
return fn()
}());
console.log(foo); // `"bar"`
setTimeout(function() {
console.log(foo()); // `"foobar"`
});

Make object's properties available inside function

I would like to do the following.I have a code like this:
var obj = {
method : function() {}
};
var func = function() {
return method(); //method is undefined here
};
func(); // What to do here?
Is it possible to call func in a way that it will see the method inside from obj as it was given for example as a parameter. I want to use obj.method inside func, without writing 'obj.' before and without modifying func itself. Is there any hack possible to achieve this?
In other words, is it possible to force obj as a closure into func?
I tried:
with(obj) {
func();
}
But it doesn't work. Anyone, any ideas? Or is it the only option to get the body of the function as string, put 'with(obj)' inside it and then create a new function out of it?
Clarification:
Because this code will be in a helper class 'eval' is OK. Which I don't want is the modification of the function through .toString(), because browsers implement it differently.

This is a solution, using eval (MDN):
var obj = {
method : function() {console.log("it workes!");}
};
var func = function() {
return method(); //method is undefined here
};
var newfunc = (function (obj, func) {
var method = obj.method;
eval("var f = " + func.toString());
return f;
}(obj, func));
newfunc(); //it workes
Basically you're just creating a new scope with a local variable called method and re-evaluating the function body in this scope. So you're basically creating a new function with the same body. I don't really like this approach and I wouldn't recommend it, but considering your constraints, it might be the only solution.
And yes, it still requires you to write obj.method, but not inside of func. So I figured, it should be ok.
EDIT
So here is a version, in which you don't have to specify the property name manually:
var newfunc = (function (__obj__, __func__) {
for (var __key__ in __obj__) {
if (__obj__.hasOwnProperty(__key__)) {
eval("var " + __key__ + " = " + __obj__[__key__]);
}
}
eval("var __f__ = " + func.toString());
return __f__;
}(obj, func));
This also done by using eval().
Note that I changed all remaining local variables to a names containing underscores, to minimize the probability of name collisions with properties inside obj.
Note also that not all valid property names are valid variable names. You could have an object like this:
var obj = {
"my func": function () {}
}
But if you would use this object you would generate a syntax error with the above method, because it would try to evaluate:
var my func = ...
As apsillers said in the comment section, it gets even worse if you don't have control over the properties of obj. In this case you shouldn't use eval at all, because you would make cross-site scripting attacks very easy (example from apsillers):
var obj = {
"a; alert('xss'); var b": function () {}
}
would evaluate to 3 different statements:
var a;
alert('xss');
var b = function () {};

This is not possible unless you define method separately:
var obj = {
method : function() {}
},
method = obj.method;
// rest of code
This is because the method reference inside func() assumes the window. namespace; thus, without modifying func() itself, it can't be done sanely.

More clarified version based on basilikum's answer, and I've found a simplification with 'with':
var obj = {
method : function() { return "it workes!"; }
};
var func = function() {
return method(); //method is undefined here
};
(function (obj, func) {
with(obj) {
eval("var __res__ = (" + func.toString() + ")()");
}
return __res__;
}(obj, func));
>> "It workes!"

Is it possible to call function.apply without changing the context?

In some Javascript code (node.js specifically), I need to call a function with an unknown set of arguments without changing the context. For example:
function fn() {
var args = Array.prototype.slice.call(arguments);
otherFn.apply(this, args);
}
The problem in the above is that when I call apply, I'm change the context by passing this as the first argument. I'd like to pass args to the function being called without changing the context of the function being called. I essentially want to do this:
function fn() {
var args = Array.prototype.slice.call(arguments);
otherFn.apply(<otherFn's original context>, args);
}
Edit: Adding more detail regarding my specific question. I am creating a Client class that contains a socket (socket.io) object among other info pertaining to a connection. I am exposing the socket's event listeners via the client object itself.
class Client
constructor: (socket) ->
#socket = socket
#avatar = socket.handshake.avatar
#listeners = {}
addListener: (name, handler) ->
#listeners[name] ||= {}
#listeners[name][handler.clientListenerId] = wrapper = =>
# append client object as the first argument before passing to handler
args = Array.prototype.slice.call(arguments)
args.unshift(this)
handler.apply(this, args) # <---- HANDLER'S CONTEXT IS CHANGING HERE :(
#socket.addListener(name, wrapper)
removeListener: (name, handler) ->
try
obj = #listeners[name]
#socket.removeListener(obj[handler.clientListenerId])
delete obj[handler.clientListenerId]
Note that clientListenerId is a custom unique identifier property that is essentially the same as the answer found here.

If I understand you correctly:
changes context
| n | y |
accepts array n | func() | func.call() |
of arguments y | ???????? | func.apply() |
PHP has a function for this, call_user_func_array. Unfortunately, JavaScript is lacking in this regard. It looks like you simulate this behavior using eval().
Function.prototype.invoke = function(args) {
var i, code = 'this(';
for (i=0; i<args.length; i++) {
if (i) { code += ',' }
code += 'args[' + i + ']';
}
eval(code + ');');
}
Yes, I know. Nobody likes eval(). It's slow and dangerous. However, in this situation you probably don't have to worry about cross-site scripting, at least, as all variables are contained within the function. Really, it's too bad that JavaScript doesn't have a native function for this, but I suppose that it's for situations like this that we have eval.
Proof that it works:
function showArgs() {
for (x in arguments) {console.log(arguments[x]);}
}
showArgs.invoke(['foo',/bar/g]);
showArgs.invoke([window,[1,2,3]]);
Firefox console output:
--
[12:31:05.778] "foo"
[12:31:05.778] [object RegExp]
[12:31:05.778] [object Window]
[12:31:05.778] [object Array]

Simply put, just assign the this to what you want it to be, which is otherFn:
function fn() {
var args = Array.prototype.slice.call(arguments);
otherFn.apply(otherFn, args);
}

'this' is a reference to your function's context. That's really the point.
If you mean to call it in the context of a different object like this:
otherObj.otherFn(args)
then simply substitute that object in for the context:
otherObj.otherFn.apply(otherObj, args);
That should be it.

If you bind the function to an object and you use everywhere the bound function, you can call apply with null, but still get the correct context
var Person = function(name){
this.name = name;
}
Person.prototype.printName = function(){
console.log("Name: " + this.name);
}
var bob = new Person("Bob");
bob.printName.apply(null); //window.name
bob.printName.bind(bob).apply(null); //"Bob"

One way that you can work around the change of context that can happen in JavaScript when functions are called, is to use methods that are part of the object's constructor if you need them to be able to operate in a context where this is not going to mean the parent object, by effectively creating a local private variable to store the original this identifier.
I concede that - like most discussions of scope in JavaScript - this is not entirely clear, so here is an example of how I have done this:
function CounterType()
{
var counter=1;
var self=this; // 'self' will now be visible to all
var incrementCount = function()
{
// it doesn't matter that 'this' has changed because 'self' now points to CounterType()
self.counter++;
};
}
function SecondaryType()
{
var myCounter = new CounterType();
console.log("First Counter : "+myCounter.counter); // 0
myCounter.incrementCount.apply(this);
console.log("Second Counter: "+myCounter.counter); // 1
}

These days you can use rest parameters:
function fn(...args) {
otherFn(...args);
}
The only downside is, if you want to use some specific params in fn, you have to extract it from args:
function fn(...args) {
let importantParam = args[2]; //third param
// ...
otherFn(...args);
}
Here's an example to try (ES next version to keep it short):
// a one-line "sum any number of arguments" function
const sum = (...args) => args.reduce((sum, value) => sum + value);
// a "proxy" function to test:
var pass = (...args) => sum(...args);
console.log(pass(1, 2, 15));

I'm not going to accept this as an answer, as I'm still hoping for something more suitable. But here's the approach I'm using right now based upon the feedback on this question so far.
For any class that will be calling Client.prototype.addListener or Client.prototype.removeListener, I did added the following code to their constructor:
class ExampleClass
constructor: ->
# ...
for name, fn of this
this[name] = fn.bind(this) if typeof(fn) == 'function'
message: (recipient, body) ->
# ...
broadcast: (body) ->
# ...
In the above example, message and broadcast will always be bound to the new ExampleClass prototype object when it's instantiated, allowing the addListener code in my original question to work.
I'm sure some of you are wondering why I didn't just do something like the following:
example = new ExampleClass
client.addListener('message', example.bind(example))
# ...
client.removeListener('message', example.bind(example))
The problem is that every time .bind( ) is called, it's a new object. So that means that the following is true:
example.bind(example) != example.bind(example)
As such, the removeListener would never work successfully, thus my binding the method once when the object is instantiated.

Since you seem to want to be using the bind function as it is defined in Javascript 1.8.5, and be able to retrieve the original this object you pass the bind function, I recommend redefining the Function.prototype.bind function:
Function.prototype.bind = function (oThis) {
if (typeof this !== "function") {
throw new TypeError("Function.prototype.bind - what is trying to be bound is not callable");
}
var aArgs = Array.prototype.slice.call(arguments, 1),
fToBind = this,
fNOP = function () {},
fBound = function () {
return fToBind.apply(this instanceof fNOP && oThis
? this
: oThis,
aArgs.concat(Array.prototype.slice.call(arguments)));
};
fNOP.prototype = this.prototype;
fBound.prototype = new fNOP();
/** here's the additional code **/
fBound.getContext = function() {
return oThis;
};
/**/
return fBound;
};
Now you can retrieve the original context that you called the bind function with:
function A() {
return this.foo+' '+this.bar;
}
var HelloWorld = A.bind({
foo: 'hello',
bar: 'world',
});
HelloWorld(); // returns "hello world";
HelloWorld.getContext(); // returns {foo:"hello", bar:"world"};

I was just reminded of this question after a long time. Looking back now, I think what I was really trying to accomplish here was something similar to how the React library works with its automatic binding.
Essentially, each function is a wrapped bound function being called:
function SomeClass() {
};
SomeClass.prototype.whoami = function () {
return this;
};
SomeClass.createInstance = function () {
var obj = new SomeClass();
for (var fn in obj) {
if (typeof obj[fn] == 'function') {
var original = obj[fn];
obj[fn] = function () {
return original.apply(obj, arguments);
};
}
}
return obj;
};
var instance = SomeClass.createInstance();
instance.whoami() == instance; // true
instance.whoami.apply(null) == instance; // true

Just push properties directly to the function's object and call it with it's own "context".
function otherFn() {
console.log(this.foo+' '+this.bar); // prints: "hello world" when called from rootFn()
}
otherFn.foo = 'hello';
otherFn.bar = 'world';
function rootFn() {
// by the way, unless you are removing or adding elements to 'arguments',
// just pass the arguments object directly instead of casting it to Array
otherFn.apply(otherFn, arguments);
}