I am not sure if this is possible at all, how ever given this article I am curious as to how a function such as:
export default () => {
let _foo = '';
return {
set foo(x) {
if (x === undefined) {
_foo = this.someFN();
} else {
_foo = x;
}
},
get foo() {
return _foo;
},
someFN() {
return 'hello'
}
}
}
There is a concept of, in the article, that there is no "reference to this" in factory functions. If this is the case how do you chain multiple factory functions together?
For instance I am working on a concept where I have written a factory function that has methods which allow you to Chain, an example would be:
const fooBar = FooBar();
fooBar.someMethod().someOtherMethod();
This works because I return this. Are you to avoid "this" in factory functions? and **Are factory functions meant to only have one method in them?
So in the case of my example above, would it be wrong to have someFN() there?
There's no hard and fast rule that you can't use this in factory functions. But if you wanted to avoid it, just remember your object in a variable and use that instead (which also avoids issues with the function being called with the wrong this):
export default () => {
let _foo = '';
let obj = {
set foo(x) {
if (x === undefined) {
_foo = this.someFN();
} else {
_foo = x;
}
},
get foo() {
return _foo;
},
someFN() {
return 'hello'
},
chainableMethod1() {
// Do something, then
return obj;
},
chainableMethod2() {
// Do something else, then
return obj;
}
};
return obj;
};
Usage:
theModule.chainableMethod1().chainableMethod2();
Related
I'm a little bit confused with the class feature in es2016, though it is assumed to be just a syntax sugar for creating classes, in comparison to function and prototype, but the behaviour in some cases is different, in particular - classes can't be called same as functions and it seems, there is no way to find out if a function is the class constructor or a simple function, without using toString and the /^class/ RegExp.
Assume the example:
class Foo {
constructor () {
this.name = 'foo';
}
}
function Bar () {
this.name = 'bar';
}
function doSmth (anyArg) {
if (typeof anyArg === 'function') {
var obj = { someProp: 'qux' };
anyArg.call(obj);
return obj;
}
// ...
}
doSmth(Bar);
doSmth(Foo); // Class constructor Foo cannot be invoked without 'new'
Is typeof 'function', but can't call it as a function! Nice.
And here are my 2 questions:
Is there some way I can call the Foo constructor function same as Bar with the overriden this context?
Is there some way I can detect the anyArg is the constructor of a class, sothat I can handle it differently in my doSmth function. Without toString and the RegExp (as the performance penalty would be huge in this case). I could then use Reflect.construct to initialize the new instance, and Object.assign to extend my obj variable with the values from the instance.
Thank you, Alex
No to both questions.
Here's how Angular 1.x detects classes:
function isClass(func) {
// IE 9-11 do not support classes and IE9 leaks with the code below.
if (msie <= 11 || typeof func !== 'function') {
return false;
}
var result = func.$$ngIsClass;
if (!isBoolean(result)) {
// Support: Edge 12-13 only
// See: https://developer.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-edge/platform/issues/6156135/
result = func.$$ngIsClass = /^(?:class\b|constructor\()/.test(stringifyFn(func));
}
return result;
}
Unfortunately, it's the best possible solution. And it even doesn't work in Firefox at that.
I'm not aware of a way to do what you ask in your first question.
For the second question, you actually identified a method to tell the difference yourself. One of the differences between a class constructor and a function used as a constructor is that the former errors when using it without the new keyword, and the latter doesn't.
So, if we use a try/catch, we can do roughly what you want:
class Foo {
constructor () {
this.name = 'foo';
}
}
function Bar () {
this.name = 'bar';
}
function doSmth (anyArg) {
if (typeof anyArg === 'function') {
var obj = { someProp: 'qux' };
try {
anyArg.call(obj);
} catch(e) {
var x = Reflect.construct(anyArg, []);
Object.assign(obj, x);
}
return obj;
}
}
doSmth(Bar);
doSmth(Foo);
To be clear, I'm not suggesting this is a good idea, good code, or that it has the performance you're looking for, but I thought I'd point out that the possibility does exist.
If you're concerned about the performance penalty of RegEx then use substring(). If you're still concerned about the performance of string operations, then consider another language that actually differentiates function types. In JavaScript they're all function.
class Foo {
constructor() {
this.name = 'foo';
}
}
function Bar() {
this.name = 'bar';
}
function doSmth(anyArg) {
if (typeof anyArg === 'function') {
var obj = {
someProp: 'qux'
};
if (anyArg.toString().substring(0, 5) === 'class') {
Object.assign(obj, new anyArg());
} else {
anyArg.call(obj);
}
return obj;
}
// ...
}
var bar = doSmth(Bar);
var foo = doSmth(Foo);
console.log(bar);
console.log(foo);
Is there a way to determine if a JavaScript function is a bound function?
Example:
var obj = {
x:1
};
function printX() {
document.write(this.x);
}
function takesACallback(cb) {
// how can one determine if this is a bounded function
// not just a function?
if (typeof cb === 'function') {
cb();
}
}
takesACallback(printX.bind(obj)); // 1
takesACallback(printX); // undefined
Perhaps this is an important point. I am not asking why the second call prints undefined.
Both bound functions and arrow functions do not have a prototype property:
typeof (function() {}).prototype // 'object' as usual
typeof (function() {}).bind(null).prototype // 'undefined'!
typeof (() => {}).prototype // 'undefined'!
This is not 100% safe since you could still manually assign this property (although that'd be weird).
As such, a simple way to check for bindability would be the following:
// ES5
function isBindable(func) {
return func.hasOwnProperty('prototype');
}
// ES6
const isBindable = func => func.hasOwnProperty('prototype');
Usage:
isBindable(function () {}); // true
isBindable(() => {}); // false
isBindable(
(function () {}).bind(null)
); // false
This way you can make sure that the function that has been passed can deal with a dynamic this.
Here is an example usage for which the above fails:
const arrowFunc = () => {};
arrowFunc.prototype = 42;
isBindable(arrowFunc); // true :(
Interestingly, while bound functions do not have a prototype property they can still be used as constructors (with new):
var Animal = function(name) {
this.name = name;
};
Animal.prototype.getName = function() {
return this.name;
};
var squirrel = new Animal('squirrel');
console.log(squirrel.getName()); // prints "squirrel"
var MutatedAnimal = Animal.bind({}); // Radiation :)
console.log(MutatedAnimal.hasOwnProperty('prototype')); // prints "false"
var mutatedSquirrel = new MutatedAnimal('squirrel with two heads');
console.log(mutatedSquirrel.getName()); // prints "squirrel with two heads"
In that case, the original function prototype (Animal) is used instead.
See JS Bin, code and link courtesy of Dmitri Pavlutin.
This of course won't work with arrow functions since they can't be used as constructors.
Unfortunately, I don't know if there is a way to distinguish a bound function (usable as constructor) from an arrow function (not usable as constructor) without trying them out with new and checking if it throws (new (() => {}) throws a "is not a constructor" error).
In environments that support ES6, you can check whether the name of the function starts with "bound " (the word "bound" followed by a space).
From the spec:
19.2.3.2 Function.prototype.bind ( thisArg , ...args)
[...]
15. Perform SetFunctionName(F, targetName, "bound").
Of course that could result in false positives if the name of the function was manually changed.
One could override the existing prototype bind, tagging functions that have been bound.
A simple solution. This will likely kill certain optimizations in V8 (and possibly other runtimes) because of hidden classes, though.
(function (bind) {
Object.defineProperties(Function.prototype, {
'bind': {
value: function (context) {
var newf = bind.apply(this, arguments);
newf.context = context;
return newf;
}
},
'isBound': {
value: function () {
return this.hasOwnProperty('context');
}
}
});
}(Function.prototype.bind));
In motion:
(function (bind) {
Object.defineProperties(Function.prototype, {
'bind': {
value: function (context) {
var newf = bind.apply(this, arguments);
newf.context = context;
return newf;
}
},
'isBound': {
value: function () {
return this.hasOwnProperty('context');
}
}
});
}(Function.prototype.bind));
var a = function () {
console.log(this);
};
var b = {
b: true
};
var c = a.bind(b);
console.log(a.isBound())
console.log(c.isBound())
console.log(c.context === b);
a();
c();
You would need to write your own bind function on the prototype. That function would build an index of what has been bound.
You could then have another function to perform a lookup against the object where that index is stored.
Based on previous answers, I create a function to determine:
function isBoundFunction(func) {
if(typeof func.prototype === 'object') return false
try {
new func()
}
catch(e) {
return false
}
return true
}
This function determine three type of functions: 1. original function, whose prototype is object, 2. arrow function, which can not be used as constructor, 3. bound function.
There is a module that can help you solve this problem : bind2.
Here's a use case :
const bind2 = require('bind2');
function testFunc() {
return this.hello;
}
const context = { hello: 'world' };
const boundFunc = bind2(testFunc, context);
console.log(boundFunc.bound); // true
Full disclosure : I wrote this module.
I'm creating an abstraction above a couple very similar, but different interfaces and can't decide on the best way to structure my code to keep is as DRY as possible. So I'm trying to refactor out all the similar code into their own functions, but aren't sure where to place these functions.
Current setup:
var module = function module( API ) {
var properties,
doSomething = function doSomething( config ) {
if (A) {
foo();
}
else if (B) {
// lotsa bar1 code
}
else if (C) {
// lotsa bar2 code
}
else {
error();
}
};
return {
// public interface
};
};
I would like to fold the bar1 and bar2 code into its own function, but can't decide where to place this function. I don't really want to cause overhead by declaring the helper inside the function it's helping, although it's the most readable option.
Option A: Make the helper function another direct method of the module.
This seems to be the easiest approach, but I don't like 'polluting' my main module namespace with functions
"that don't represent a method of the module."
edit: "that don't represent an action of the module."
var module = function module( API ) {
var properties,
bar = function bar() {
// help doSomething
},
doSomething = function doSomething( config ) {
if (A) {
foo();
}
else if (B) {
bar(B);
}
else if (C) {
bar(C);
}
else {
error();
}
};
return {
// public interface
};
};
Option B: Create a seperate namespace for all the helpers. This is how I usually structure these kinds of extra functions, but the more I use this version, the less satisfying it seems.
var module = function module( API ) {
var properties,
helpers = {
'bar' : function bar( input ) {
// help doSomething
}
},
doSomething = function doSomething( config ) {
if (A) {
foo();
}
else if (B) {
helpers.bar(B);
}
else if (C) {
helpers.bar(C);
}
else {
error();
}
};
return {
// public interface
};
};
Option C: Set the helper function as a method of the main function.
var module = function module( API ) {
var properties,
doSomething = function doSomething( config ) {
if (A) {
foo();
}
else if (B) {
doSomething.bar(B);
}
else if (C) {
doSomething.bar(C);
}
else {
error();
}
};
doSomething.bar = function( input ) {
// help doSomething
};
return {
// public interface
};
};
And option D would be to create a closure around the function.
Maybe I'm putting way too much thought in this and it's all a matter of preference.
I would like to known if there is a native way of doing this :
Object.prototype.chain = function(f) { return f.call(this) }
function fun1() {
doSomethingWithObject(this)
return this
}
function fun2() {
doSomethingElse(this)
return this
}
someObject
.method1('something')
.method2()
.chain(checkSomething() ? fun1 : fun2)
.method3()
But I do not feel like changing the prototype of Object. Is there a way to do this without modifying the prototype of Objects or the other constructors that I use (and am not the developer of)
Edits :
I feel I do not explain very well, so let' add some details :
What I would like to do is to use some APIs I do not define. someObject is defined like the following, with chainable methods :
var someObject = {
method1: function(val) {
// do something
return this
},
method2: function() {
// do something
return this
},
method3: function() {
// do something
return this
}
}
Now imagine I cannot change this code, because this object is from a library, and so I don't want to. Then, imagine that I would like to chain methods and some custom functions (see my first snippet) for many more different objects. The simplest thing to do is to attach a chain method to Object.prototype.
But I think that it could result in conflicts in the future. I am looking for a way to do the same thing without touching the prototype.
I'm surprised there are no answers to this to be honest.
There are many ways to natively introduce chaining. I like to use the revealing module pattern.
So I create a basic model (Go ahead and chuck this in your chrome of firefox console)
var Dog = function(name) {
var self = this;
this.name = name;
var core = {
getName:function(){
return self.name;
}
};
this.movement = function(){ //this function will be exposed including its returned functions for chaining
console.log(self.name + " is getting restless... ");
var jump = function(){
console.log(self.name + " jumps around ");
return this //returns the movement scope
};
var run = function(){
console.log(self.name + " has decided to run");
return this //returns the movement scope
};
return {
jump:jump,
run:run
};
}
console.log("A Pup has been born, we shall call him... " + name);
return{
movement:self.movement //only .movement is exposed to the outside world
};
}
Now create a new dog using var p = new Dog("doggyName");
now, you can chain functions. Try:
p.movement().jump().run().jump().run();
You should get the console logged text that corresponds with each function.
By returning the scope of this after executing your movement function you expose the additional functions that are returned in that scope (see the comments in the code). These can then be chained onto the end of your current function provided they are in the same scope. This allows you to scope specific parts of your code. For example with this dog, all movement is scoped to self.movement, you could have all eating scoped to self.eat and so on
Read up on the revealing module pattern. Though this is not the only way to do it.
The wrapper is something that will wrap any object to make it compatible with "chaining" and will add another chain method that will allow you to plug external functions and still get the chaining.
Check this example:
function myObj() {
this.state = {
a: 1
};
this.method1 = function () {
console.log("1");
}
this.method2 = function () {
console.log("2");
}
this.method3 = function () {
console.log("3");
}
this.method4 = function () {
console.log(this.state);
}
}
function objectChainWrapper(obj) {
this.chain = function (fn) {
fn.call(obj);
return this;
}
for (var prop in obj) {
if (obj.hasOwnProperty(prop) && typeof obj[prop] == 'function') {
this[prop] = (function (methodName) {
return function () {
obj[methodName].call(obj);
return this;
}
}(prop))
}
}
}
var obj = new myObj();
var wrapper = new objectChainWrapper(obj);
var chainMethod = function(){ console.log('chain') };
var chainMethodState = function(){ console.log(this.state) };
wrapper.method1().method2().chain(chainMethodState).method3().chain(chainMethod).method4();
JSFIDDLE.
To "plug" an unbound function into the object's method chain you can assign it to a property and call that:
function fn() {
document.write('hi ');
return this;
}
someObj = {
meth1: function() {
document.write('meth1 ');
return this;
},
meth2: function() {
document.write('meth2 ');
return this;
}
}
someObj
.meth1()
[someObj._=fn, '_']()
.meth2()
This doesn't look very pretty if you ask me. A more readable option is to add the chain method on the fly, like:
function chainable(obj) {
obj.chain = function(fn) {
return fn.call(this);
}
return obj;
}
chainable(someObj).meth1().chain(fn).meth2()
This is what I'm doing right now.
var foo = function() {
var x = someComplicatedComputationThatMayTakeMoreTime();
this.foo = function() { return x; };
return x;
}
It works but only if foo is called as a function like so
foo();
But what if I want to call it as a normal variable with a value? I could modify the code to be
var foo = function() {
var x = someComplicatedComputationThatMayTakeMoreTime();
this.foo = x;
return x;
}
That would allow me to only call it once as a function and after that as a regular variable. But it's still not what I want. Plus it gets complicated if it accidentally gets called as a function again, returning an error.
Is this even possible in JavaScript?
BTW, this is for a Chrome/Firefox extension, so IE compatibility does not matter.
Ended up using toString because getters don't allow me to redefine the whole attribute, a function must be associated with it. And toString has cleaner syntax.
How about using toString?
var foo = function() {
function someComplicatedComputationThatMayTakeMoreTime() {
//your calculations
}
return {
toString: function() {
return someComplicatedComputationThatMayTakeMoreTime();
}
}
}
More about Object-to-Primitive Conversions in JavaScript
EDIT based on comment. Use a singleton (I think it's called):
myObject.prop = (function(){
function someComplicatedComputationThatMayTakeMoreTime() {
//your calculations
}
return {
toString: function() {
return someComplicatedComputationThatMayTakeMoreTime();
}
}
})()
If only Internet Explorer didn't exist, you could use getters and setters as described by John Resig in this blog article:
John Resig: JavaScript Getters and Setters
... They allow you to bind special functions to an object that look like normal object properties, but actually execute hidden functions instead.
Using a function is your best option for now, however the new JavaScript standard (ECMAScript 5th Ed.) which is being implemented now by all major browser vendors, gives you a method to create accessor properties, where you can define a property with a get and set functions that will be internally called, without worrying to treat this properties as functions, e.g.:
var obj = {};
Object.defineProperty(obj, 'foo', {
get: function () { // getter logic
return 'foo!';
},
set: function (value) {
// setter logic
}
});
obj.foo; // "foo!", no function call
This new standard will take some time to be implemented for all browsers, (the IE9 preview version really disappointed me), and I wouldn't recommend you to use it for production, unless you have total control on the environment where your application will be used.
What I think you want is a lazily instantiated variable, which can be implemented like this.
var myProperty = null;
function getMyProperty() {
return (myProperty = myProperty || builder());
}
This is not practical on the web because IE does not support it, but you can look at
https://developer.mozilla.org/en/defineGetter for examples how to do this.
There are a couple ways to do it, here is one example:
var data = {};
data.__defineGetter__("prop",
(function () {
var value = null;
return function () {
if (null == value) {
value = getYourValueHere();
}
return value;
};
})());
and now you can use it like:
var a = data.prop;
var b = data.prop;
I would recommend a variation on ChaosPandion's answer, but with a closure.
var myProperty = (function () {
var innerProperty = null;
return function() {
return (innerProperty = innerProperty || someComplicatedComputationThatMayTakeMoreTime());
};
})();
and then use myProperty() every time you need to access the variable.
You could define a JavaScript getter. From the Apple JavaScript Coding Guidelines:
myObject.__defineGetter__( "myGetter", function() { return this.myVariable; } );
var someVariable = myObject.myGetter;
See John Resig's post, JavaScript Getters and Setters, and the Defining Getters and Setters page at the Mozilla Developer Centre for more information.
I would use explicit lazy evaluation. Here's my implementation of it based on Scheme's take:
var delay, lazy, force, promise, promiseForced, promiseRunning;
(function () {
var getValue = function () {
return this.value;
};
var RUNNING = {};
var DelayThunk = function (nullaryFunc) {
this.value = nullaryFunc;
};
DelayThunk.prototype.toString = function () {
return "[object Promise]";
};
DelayThunk.prototype.force = function () {
if (promiseRunning (this)) {
throw new Error ("Circular forcing of a promise.");
}
var nullaryFunc = this.value;
this.value = RUNNING;
this.value = nullaryFunc ();
this.force = getValue;
return this.value;
};
var LazyThunk = function (nullaryFunc) {
DelayThunk.call (this, nullaryFunc);
};
LazyThunk.prototype = new DelayThunk (null);
LazyThunk.prototype.constructor = LazyThunk;
LazyThunk.prototype.force = function () {
var result = DelayThunk.prototype.force.call (this);
while (result instanceof LazyThunk) {
result = DelayThunk.prototype.force.call (result);
}
return force (result);
};
delay = function (nullaryFunc) {
return new DelayThunk (nullaryFunc);
};
lazy = function (nullaryFunc) {
return new LazyThunk (nullaryFunc);
};
force = function (expr) {
if (promise (expr)) {
return expr.force ();
}
return expr;
};
promise = function (expr) {
return expr instanceof DelayThunk;
};
promiseForced = function (expr) {
return expr.force === getValue || !promise (expr);
};
promiseRunning = function (expr) {
return expr.value === RUNNING || !promise (expr);
};
}) ();
Example Syntax:
var x = lazy (function () { return expression; });
var y = force (x);
var z = delay (function () { return expression; });
var w = force (z);
Note values are stored once evaluated, so repeated forcing will not do extra computations.
Example usage:
function makeThunk (x, y, z) {
return lazy (function () {
// lots of work done here
});
}
var thunk = makeThunk (arg1, arg2, arg3);
if (condition) {
output (force (thunk));
output (force (thunk)); // no extra work done; no extra side effects either
}
You can use the javascript Proxy class for creating such functionality.
var object = {};
var handler = {
resolvers: {},
get ( target, property, proxy ) {
if ( ! target.hasOwnProperty( property ) && this.resolvers.hasOwnProperty( property ) ) {
// execute the getter for the property;
target[ property ] = this.resolvers[ property ]();
}
return target[ property ];
},
set ( target, property, value, receiver ) {
// if the value is function set as a resolver
if ( typeof value === 'function' ) {
this.resolvers[property] = value;
// otherwise set value to target
} else {
target.property = value;
}
},
has ( target, property, receiver ) {
//true when proxy handler has either a resolver or target has a value;
return this.resolvers.hasOwnProperty( property ) || target.hasOwnProperty( property );
}
};
var lazyObject = new Proxy( object, handler );
Now you can use it like this:
'exampleField' in lazyObject; //returns false
lazyObject.exampleField = function(){ return 'my value' }; // add a resolver function
'exampleField' in lazyObject; //returns true
lazyObject.exampleField; //executes your resolver function and returns 'my value'
This example is to demonstrate the working. You can change after your needs.
Here is a fiddle with a demonstration