I've done quite a bit of reading and seen many different questions regarding this topic, but I was wondering if I could get help on WHY breaking out of a For Each loop doesn't work. Also, I am pretty new, so I apologize in advance if this question was answered in a different way that I wasn't able to understand.
So far, I have written a forEach function to emulate a native .forEach method:
function forEach(collection, callback){
if(collection.isArray){
for(var i =0;i<collection.length&&callback(collection[i])!==false;i++){
callback(collection[i]);
}
}else{
for(var key in collection){
callback(collection[key]);
}
}
}
When I try to utilize this to write another function 'find' that searches for the first instance of the array that matches a criteria, using 'return' or 'break' doesn't seem to work. find([1,2,3,4,5].function(x){return x>3;}); returns 5 instead of 4.
function find (collection, criteria){
var result;
forEach(collection, function(x){
if(criteria(x)){
result =x;
return false;
}
});
return result;
}
I have been able to recreate the effect that I want using other functions, but would like to understand why this doesn't work, as I am learning how to implement the use of functions within other functions.
Thank you.
Consider the behavior of bar in this code snippet:
function foo(x) {
return x;
}
function bar() {
foo(1);
foo(2);
return 3;
}
console.log(bar());
It calls foo, which returns, but it is returning control back to bar itself, not to the caller of bar, so this logs 3.
The situation does not change if we put the definition of foo inside bar:
function bar() {
function foo(x) {
return x;
}
foo(1);
foo(2);
return 3;
}
console.log(bar());
Nor does it change if we accept it as a parameter:
function foo(x) {
return x;
}
function bar(baz) {
baz(1);
baz(2);
return 3;
}
console.log(bar(foo));
The behavior does not change when we use a function expression, either:
function bar(baz) {
baz(1);
baz(2);
return 3;
}
console.log(bar(function(x) {
return x;
}));
So the reason return does not work the way you are expecting from a function passed to forEach is that return retains its usual meaning of returning from the function it is in—not the function that lexically encloses that function. Similarly, break is illegal because it is not in a loop; it is in a function (that only happens to be called in a loop later on).
For an array, collection.isArray is undefined. You should replace this with Array.isArray(collection).
For non-array types, you're not checking the return value of callback(collection[key]).
Related
I'm trying to understand exactly how this Once function by David Walsh works:
`
function once(fn, context) {
var result;
return function() {
if(fn) {
result = fn.apply(context || this, arguments);
fn = null;
}
return result;
};
}
// Usage
var canOnlyFireOnce = once(function() {
console.log('Fired!');
});
canOnlyFireOnce(); // "Fired!"
canOnlyFireOnce(); // nada
`
I understand it takes a function as a argument, and returns a function that calls the passed function only once.
But I'm trying to understand what each part is doing. Can anyone help explain? especially this part:
result = fn.apply(context || this, arguments);
Why the OR sign? what is "this" and how is it getting the arguments from fn? What purpose does 'context' serve?
I wrote a similar once() function for school that returns the result of the passed function, and stores the result to return it again if the function attempts to get called again. It took a lot of trial and error, and I'm just trying to get a firm grasp on all the component parts of how this works.
`
function add(x, y) {
return x + y;
}
function once(fn) {
let timesRan = 0;
let result;
function doOnce() {
if (timesRan === 0) {
timesRan = 1;
result = fn.apply(this, arguments); //I don't understand how this gets the arguments from AddOnce
console.log(`did it once: ${result}`)
return result;
} else {
return result;
}
}
return doOnce;
}
var addOnce = once(add);
console.log(addOnce(1, 2)); // test first call, expected value: 3
console.log(addOnce(2, 5)); // test second call, expected value: 3
console.log(addOnce(8, 22)); // test third call, expected value: 3
`
The concept behind this in JavaScript is confusing, because when I write a function such as:
function getPersonName() {
return this.name
}
I expect that this be defined as a some object with a name attribute. Depending on the scope, I may have this be defined and no problems! But in order for a function such as the above to properly reference this, we need to tell it what it should reference when we use that keyword.
For example, it allows us to do the following:
var canOnlyFireOnce = once(function() {
console.log(this.name)
}, {name: "John"});
canOnlyFireOnce() // prints John
canOnlyFireOnce() // nada
It may be helpful to understand the bind function's use cases in JavaScript to understand why having this (no pun intended) is useful.
The meaning of the this context in function.apply is already explained in rb612's answer.
For the question about arguments, you need to know that
the arguments object is a local variable available within all non-arrow functions. You can refer to a function's arguments inside that function by using its arguments object.
I read Addy's book here about revealing module patter. However, if you execute the example code it actually returns undefined. A fix is to add 'return' before each called functions. Am I supposed to add return for each functions being called if using RMP? Is this the right way to make it work? What am I missing?
var myRevealingModule = (function () {
var privateCounter = 0;
function privateFunction() {
privateCounter++; <--need to add return
}
function publicFunction() {
publicIncrement(); <-- need to add return
}
function publicIncrement() {
privateFunction(); <--need to add return
}
function publicGetCount(){
return privateCounter;
}
// Reveal public pointers to
// private functions and properties
return {
start: publicFunction,
increment: publicIncrement,
count: publicGetCount
};
})();
myRevealingModule.start(); <-return undefined
http://addyosmani.com/resources/essentialjsdesignpatterns/book/#revealingmodulepatternjavascript
The issue nas nothing to do with RMP but rather with functions and return values.
Why would you expect a method that doesn't return anything to actually return something other than undefined?
Take a closer look here. The start in fact calls publicFunction but the body of the latter doesn't return anything.
Yet you call it and expect a value.
The answer to your question is then: yes, if you want a value back from the function, you have to return it.
In this particlar example they have a method count to return current value. Two other methods are just used to control the counter.
I'm getting around to learning JavaScript - really learning JavaScript. I come from a PHP background so some JavaScript concepts are still new to me, especially asynchronous programming. This question might have already been answered many times before but I have not been able to find an answer. It might be because I don't really even know how to ask the question other than by showing an example. So here it is:
When using the deferred package from npm, I see the following example:
delayedAdd(2, 3)(function (result) {
return result * result
})(function (result) {
console.log(result); // 25
});
They refer to this as chaining and it actually works as I'm currently using this code to check when a promise is resolved or is rejected. Even though they call it chaining, it reminds me of trailing closures like in Swift.
I don't really understand what type of chaining this is since we have a function invocation and then immediately after, an anonymous function enclosed in parentheses.
So I guess I have two questions.
What pattern is this?
How does it work? This may be a loaded question but I like to know how something works so when someone asks me about this I can give them a detailed explanation.
Here is the delayedAdd function:
var delayedAdd = delay(function (a, b) {
return a + b;
}, 100);
which uses the following function:
var delay = function (fn, timeout) {
return function () {
var def = deferred(), self = this, args = arguments;
setTimeout(function () {
var value;
try {
value = fn.apply(self, args));
} catch (e) {
def.reject(e);
return;
}
def.resolve(value);
}, timeout);
return def.promise;
};
};
It's actually really easy to understand. Let's look at what's going on here when the expression is evaluated:
First the delayedAdd(2, 3) function will be called. It does some stuff and then returns. The "magic" is all about its return value which is a function. To be more precise it's a function that expects at least one argument (I'll get back to that).
Now that we evaluated delayedAdd(2, 3) to a function we get to the next part of the code, which is the opening parenthesis. Opening and closing parenthesis are of course function calls. So we're going to call the function that delayedAdd(2, 3) just returned and we're going to pass it an argument, which is what gets defined next:
That argument is yet another function (as you can see in your example). This function also takes one argument (the result of the computation) and returns it multiplied by itself.
This function that was returned by the first call to delayedAdd(2, 3) returns yet another function, which we'll call again with an argument that is another function (the next part of the chain).
So to summarize we build up a chain of functions by passing our code to whatever function delayedAdd(2, 3) returned. These functions will return other functions that we can pass our functions again.
I hope this makes the way it works somewhat clear, if not feel free to ask more.
mhlz's answer is very clear. As a supplementary, here I compose a delayedAdd for your to better understand the process
function delayedAdd(a, b) {
var sum = a + b
return function(f1) {
var result1 = f1(sum)
return function(f2) {
f2(result1)
}
}
}
Where in your example code, the function you passed as f1 is:
function (result) {
return result * result
}
and f2 is:
function (result) {
console.log(result)
}
Functions are first-class citizens in JS - that means (among others), they can take the role of actual parameters and function return values. Your code fragment maps functions to functions.
The signatures of the functions in your chained call might look like this.
delayedAdd: number -> fn // returns function type a
a: fn ( number -> number) -> fn // returns function type b
b: fn ( number -> void ) -> void // returns nothing ( guessing, cannot know from your code portion )
General setting
Of course, JS is a weakly typed language, so the listed signatures are derived from the code fragment by guessing. There is no way to know whether the code actually does what is suggested above apart from inspecting the sources.
Given that this showed up in the context of 'chaining', the signatures probably rather look like this:
delayedAdd: number x number -> fn (( fn T -> void ) -> ( fn T -> void ))
Which means that delayedAdd maps two numbers to a function x, which maps functions of arbitrary signatures to functions of the same signature as itself.
So who would do anything like this ? And why ?
Imagine the following implementation of x:
//
// x
// Collects functions of unspecified (possibly implicit) signatures for later execution.
// Illustrative purpose only, do not use in production code.
//
// Assumes
function x ( fn ) {
var fn_current;
if (this.deferred === undefined) {
this.deferred = [];
}
if (fn === undefined) {
// apply functions
while ( this.deferred.length > 0 ) {
fn_current = this.deferred.shift();
this.accumulator = fn_current(this.accumulator);
}
return this.accumulator;
}
else {
this.deferred.push ( fn );
}
return this;
}
Together with a function delayedAdd that actually returns an object of the following kind ...:
function delayedAdd ( a1, a2) {
return x ( function () { a1 + a2; } );
}
... you'll effectively register a chain of functions to be executed at some later point of time (e.g. in a callback to some event).
Notes and reminders
JS functions are JS objects
The signatures of the registered functions may actually be arbitrary. Considering them to be unified just serves to keep this exposition simpler (well ...).
Caveat
I do not know whether the outlined codeis what node.js does (but it could be ... ;-))
To be fair this pattern can be either chaining or currying(or partial application). Depending how it's implemented. Note this is a theoretical answer to provide more information about the pattern and not your specific use case.
Chaining
There is nothing special here because we can just return a function that will be called again. Functions in javascript are first class citizens
function delayedAdd(x, y) {
// In here work with x and y
return function(fn) {
// In here work with x, y and fn
return function(fn2) {
//Continue returning functions so long as you want the chain to work
}
}
}
This make it unreadable in my opinion. There is a better alternative.
function delayedAdd(x, y) {
// In here work with x and y
return {
then: function(fn) {
// In here work with x, y and fn
return {
then: function(fn2) {
//Continue returning functions so long as you want the chain to work
}
}
}
}
}
This changes the way your functions are called from
delayedAdd(..)(..)(..); // 25
is transformed to
delayedAdd().then().then()
Not only is more readable when you are passing several callback functions but allows a distinction from the next pattern called currying.
Currying
The term cames after the mathematician Haskell Curry. The definition is this
In mathematics and computer science, currying is the technique of translating the evaluation of a function that takes multiple arguments (or a tuple of arguments) into evaluating a sequence of functions, each with a single argument (partial application). It was introduced by Moses Schönfinkel and later developed by Haskell Curry.
Basically what it does is take several arguments and merge with the subsecuents and apply them to the original function passed in the first argument.
This is a generic implementation of this function taken from Stefanv's Javascript Patterns.
{Edit}
I changed my previous version of the function to one which has partial application included to make a better example. In this version you must call the function with no argument to get the value returned or you will get another partially applied function as result. This is a very basic example, a more complete one can be found on this post.
function schonfinkelize(fn) {
var slice = Array.prototype.slice,
stored_args = [],
partial = function () {
if (arguments.length === 0){
return fn.apply(null, stored_args);
} else {
stored_args = stored_args.concat(slice.call(arguments));
return partial;
}
};
return partial;
}
This are the results of the application of this function
function add(a, b, c, d, e) {
return a + b + c + d + e;
}
schonfinkelize(add)(1, 2, 3)(5, 5)(); ==> 16
Note that add (or in your case delayedAdd) can be implemented as the curying function resulting in the pattern of your example giving you this
delayedAdd(..)(..)(..); // 16
Summary
You can not reach a conclusion about the pattern just by looking at the way the functions are called. Just because you can invoke one after the other it doens't mean is chaining. It could be another pattern. That depends on the implementation of the function.
All excellent answers here, especially #mhlz and #Leo, I'd like to touch on the chaining part you've mentioned. Leo's example shows the idea of calling functions like foo()()() but only works for fixed number of callbacks. Here's an attempt to imlpement unlimited chaining:
delayedAdd = function da(a, b){
// a function was passed: call it on the result
if( typeof a == "function" ){
this.result = a( this.result )
}
else {
// the initial call with two numbers, no additional checks for clarity.
this.result = a + b;
}
// return this very function
return da;
};
Now you can chain any number of functions in () after the first call:
// define some functions:
var square = function( number ){ return number * number; }
var add10 = function( number ){ return number + 10; }
var times2 = function( number ){ return number * 2; }
var whatIs = function( number ){ console.log( number ); return number; }
// chain them all!
delayedAdd(2, 3)(square)(whatIs)(add10)(whatIs)(times2)(whatIs);
// logs 23, 35 and 70 in the console.
http://jsfiddle.net/rm9nkjt8/3/
If we expand this syntax logically we would reach something like this:
var func1 = delayedAdd(2, 3);
var func2 = function (result) {
return result * result
};
var func3 = function (result) {
console.log(result);
};
var res = func1(func2); // variable 'res' is of type 'function'
res(func3);
i am starting to look at JS in more detail and after testing out some code i have come up with this situation:
var hello = function ()
{
console.log(arguments);
return (function(x,y){console.log(arguments);return x*y;});
}();
console.log(hello(2,5));
The output from the console is as follows:
[object Arguments] { ... }
[object Arguments] {
0: 2,
1: 5
}
10
Can someone please explain the behavior as i cannot get my head around it.
I understand the the first function is an IIFE and it is being executed immediately when it is created. My only problem is how does the passed parameters be passed to the internal function?
Thanks in advance for the information and comments
Alright, let me see if I can unwrap this for you:
var hello = function ()
{
console.log(arguments);
return (function(x,y){
console.log(arguments);
return x*y;
});
}();
console.log(hello(2,5));
First, I'm going to split out the IFFE into a function statement. It will work the same, but be more like traditional code:
// Create our function
function action(x, y) {
console.log(arguments);
return x*y;
}
var hello = function ()
{
console.log(arguments);
//Here we are returning a REFERENCE to a function that already exists.
// We are *not* running the `action` function -- just getting its
// reference so it can be called later.
return action;
}();
// At this point in time, if you did a
console.log(hello)
// You'd see that it just points to the `action` function -- since that is what the
// IIFE returned.
console.log(hello(2,5));
The value hello is now our action function.
The IFFE syntax has the following advantages:
Since it is an anonymous function, you aren't using a name or cluttering the global object.
The code is more "in-line" instead of being split into two separate pieces.
Might help, by the way, if I explain the difference between a function statement and a function expression.
A function statement looks like this:
function functionStatemnt() {
...
}
The functionStatement is available at compile done. That code doesn't need executed in order to be available.
A function expression is more like:
var functionExpression = function() {
...
};
And an IFFE is a function expression that immediately invokes. Gives you a way to create a scope and "hide" variables.
var myCounter = function() {
var counter = 0;
return function() {
return counter++;
}
}
console.log(myCounter());
console.log(myCounter());
console.log(myCounter());
Assume I have a js function. From some other point in the program, I want to run its code, but not its return statement. In its place, I would like to run some other return statement that references the variables in the scope of the original function.
Is there a way to do this, other than loading up the function source, replacing the return, and using eval on the result? Minimal modification of the original is possible, though it should not affect the original's performance by adding e.g. an extra function call.
You could try something like this, but I'm not sure it meets your conditions.
Edit: Fixed to work in jsfiddle
// Modified to set all "shared" variables as "members" of the function.
var test = function() {
test.val = "one";
test.val2 = "two";
return 1;
}
// Using different result
function test2() {
test();
return test.val2;
}
Unless you're able to restructure your methods to accommodate a callback or introduce some other parameter-based logic-flow (not an option for 3rd party code), you're out of luck.
Here's a callback sample (fiddle, credit to dzejkej's answer)
function foo(callback) {
var x = 2;
// pass your values into the callback
return callback ? callback.call(this, x) : x * 2;
}
document.write(foo());
document.write("<hr/>");
// specify the parameters for your callback
document.write(foo(function(x){ return x * 4;}) );
You can introduce a callback function that will get called if available otherwise "standard" value will be returned.
function test(callback) {
// ...
return callback ? callback.call(this) : /* original value returned */ "xyz";
}
test(function() { /* "this" is same as in test() */ });
EDIT:
If you want to pass variables inside callback then you just list them in the .call() function.
Example:
function test(callback) {
var a = 4;
var b = 2;
// ...
return callback ? callback.call(this, a, b) : a * b;
}
test(); // 8
test(function(a, b) { return a + b; }); // 6
See this fiddle.
Provided that you would keep variables of the outer scope function within a single object, you could try something like the following:
function original(a, b, c, rep) {
var data = {};
// Do some fancy stuff but make sure to keep everything under data
data.a = a.replace(/foo/, 'bar');
...
if ( Object.prototype.toString.call(rep) === '[object Function]' )
return rep.call(data);
return data;
}
function replacement() {
return 'foo' + this.a;
}
// Now let's make use of both the original and the replacement ...
console.log(original('foo', x, y)); // => {a: "bar", b: ...}
console.log(original('foo', x, y, replacement)); // => {a: "foobar", b: ...}
Hope, it's what you where asking for.
cheers
I think you really misunderstand the concept of return statement. The return statement of a function will simply return a value, or an object, or undefined if there is no return parameter specified.
If all you're trying to do is execute a function but "not its return statement" than you would just invoke the function and not do anything with the returned value/object:
However, if what you mean is that you would like to execute a function but not execute the "parameter" to its return statement then that literally means to selectively execute an arbitrary portion of the body of a function. And as far as I know that is not possible (without using reflection to get the function definition, modify the definition, and then dynamically invoking the modified version - which you said you didn't want to do).