Develop Reference

I don't understand working of the program

I am learning objects in JavaScript and I don't understand methods assigned as property to objects, when objects are defined through user-defined functions.
This is a code snippet from tutorial point.com/JavaScript
<script type = "text/javascript">
function addPrice(amount) {
with(this){
price = amount;
}
}
function book(title, author) {
this.title = title;
this.author = author;
this.price = 0;
this.addPrice = addPrice;
}
</script>
<script type = "text/javascript">
var myBook = new book("Perl", "Mohtashim");
myBook.addPrice(100);
document.write("Book title is : " + myBook.title + "<br>");
document.write("Book author is : " + myBook.author + "<br>");
document.write("Book price is : " + myBook.price + "<br>");
</script>
I want to know how the this.addPrice = addPrice is working and why if I remove the line no output is shown?

JS is pretty flexible language. In JS this:
var obj = {
name: "Raju Ritigya",
sayHi: function() {
console.log("hello, I'm " + this.name);
}
};
Is the same as this:
var obj = {};
obj.name = "Raju Ritigya";
obj.sayHi = function() {
console.log("hello, I'm " + this.name);
};
Basically, there are two ways of adding properties and methods to an object in JS.
With that being said, your course is teaching you how to write "Classes", constructors and this in JS. IMO if you're just starting with JS, this is too complex to understand. JS doesn't support Classes natively and it tries to mimic them with prototype inheritance.
But anyway, here's my 0.02$ on what's going on there
In JS you have primitive types (string, number, boolean, symbol, null, undefined) and everything else is an object (yes, array is an object, function is an object, object is an object).
Primitive values are passed around by value and they are immutable, but objects are passed by reference (a point in memory) and they are mutable
var foo = {};
var bar = {};
console.log(foo === bar) //false
Even though foo and bar look the same, they point to different places in memory, hence for JS they are not the same!
var foo = {};
var bar = foo;
bar.name = "random name";
console.log(foo.name); // "random name"
And now foo and bar point to the same reference and making changes to one of them reflect to the other one.
In JS every function needs to return something. If you don't explicitly put a return statement in your function it will return undefined and if you use new keyword in front of your function call, it will return a new object that will have that function as a constructor.
So, in conclusion, what's going on there is that you have a constructor (book) that's gonna return an object with 3 properties (author, title, price) and a method (addPrice). That method is a function (and as we already said, functions are objects in JS and can be easily passed around). It would be exactly the same if you wrote your constructor like this:
function book(title, author) {
this.title = title;
this.author = author;
this.price = 0;
this.addPrice = function(amount) {
this.price = amount
};
}
As #deceze mentioned, using with is highly discouraged.
By removing the this.addPrice = addPrice line, you don't add a method to your object but later on you try to call it on this line myBook.addPrice(100);
Your code breaks on that line and JS won't continue executing the rest of your program (you can open console tab in dev tools and see the error there).
Hope it helps,
Cheers!

Passing parameter to a module javascript

I am using module pattern in javascript.
Is it a way to create instances of a "class" ?
I am using it in a right way ?
var moduleClass = (function () {
var a =5;
return {
getA: function () {
console.log(a);
}
};
})();
var instance = moduleClass;
instance.getA();
http://jsfiddle.net/PzLKy/
How can I pass parameters on new instances ?

You don't really need new here, Below is the right way to code to achieve what you are trying to achieve.
Also, be really careful while using new, if used unwisely it can start clobbering your Global variable, If you want to use new, John Resig has a really nice explaination for how to do it the right way, for more read this article by John Resig
http://ejohn.org/blog/simple-class-instantiation/
http://jsfiddle.net/PzLKy/2/
var moduleClass = (function () {
var a =5;
return {
setA: function (inA) {
a=inA;
} ,
getA: function () {
alert(a);
}
};
})();
var instance = moduleClass;
instance.setA(8);
instance.getA();
Edit:
contactmatt is right, definitely dont be afraid of using constructor, but here is some thing you need to be aware of
Taken from John Resig's article mentioned in the first paragraph,
suppose this is your code
function User(first, last){
this.name = first + " " + last;
}
var user = new User("John", "Resig");
user.name // John Resig
var user2 = User ("first","last");
user2.name //undefined, also this would pollute your current scope
if you call the constructor, you would not get any kind of indication and can be a debugging nightmare.
a way to solve this is
function User(first, last){
if ( this instanceof User ) {
this.name = first + " " + last;
} else
return new User(first, last);
}
To Conclude,
So if you feel that constructor is the best way for your problem, use it. But be aware, also the simple class instantiation by John is a really useful pattern, try to go through it,he also explains generic constructor.

Use constructor functions. Don't be afraid of "new", just use it wisely.
Note: Standard naming convention is to name functions that will be used as function constructors with a capital letter. (i.e. ModuleClass instead of moduleClass)
function ModuleClass() {
var a =5;
return {
getA: function () {
console.log(a);
}
};
};
or if you're brave enough to learn about the 'this' keyword in JavaScript.
function ModuleClass() {
var a =5;
this.getA = function () {
console.log(a);
};
};
var instance = new moduleClass();
instance.getA();

For creating instances you have to use the key word new with any function.
This function aka Constructor can help you create multiple instances
var moduleClass = (function () {
var a =5;
return {
getA: function () {
console.log(a);
}
};
})();
var instance = new moduleClass;
instance.getA();
Constructor:Constructor functions are used with the new keyword, and they're one of the ways you give an object a prototype.
REFER-->
Javascript Prototypes,objects,constructor??i am confused
Constructors in JavaScript objects

javascript is it possible to use a string to call a object function

I have a generic function which can speak to multiple other functions in appropriate objects is it possible to use a string to call the appropriate function.
var string = "save";
var generic = (new function (string) {
string."alert()";
return this;
})
var save = (new function (string) {
this.alert = (function () {
alert("your document has been saved")
return this
})
return this
})
var notSaved = (new function (string) {
this.alert = (function () {
alert("your document has not been saved")
return this
})
return this
})
I am using it for a far more complex set up but here is an example. Is this possible?

Sure you can. Try something like this:
window[string].alert();

Looking at your code it's hard to tell what you're actually trying to achieve. Nonetheless, here are a few ideas that may be relevant.
First, let's make a couple of objects:
var rabbit = {
name: 'Peter',
hop: function () {
return this.name + ' hopped!'
},
jump: function () {
return this.name + ' jumped!'
}
}
var hairy_maclary = {
name: 'Hairy Maclary',
jump: function () {
return this.name + ' jumped over the fence!'
}
}
Now, you could define a function which invokes the hop method on whichever object is passed to it:
function hop(object) {
return object.hop()
}
hop(rabbit) // 'Peter hopped!'
I'm not sure why you'd do this rather than invoking hop directly, but perhaps you want to do extra stuff before or afterwards.
If you wanted to you could create a completely generic function which would invoke a given method on a given object:
function invokeMethod(object, method) {
object[method]()
}
invokeMethod(hairy_maclary, 'jump') // 'Hairy Maclary jumped over the fence!'
This is a really strange thing to want to do, though. Perhaps you could provide more of an idea of what you're actually trying to do, since your example code is rather odd.

You can enclose your functions within some object so you can access by passing name of the property using some variable (in this case named string), eg. like that:
var string = 'notSaved';
var funcs = {};
funcs.save = new function(){
this.alert = function(){
alert('called save.alert()');
};
return this;
};
funcs.notSaved = new function(){
this.alert = function(){
alert('called notSaved.alert()');
};
return this;
};
funcs[string].alert();
See working example on jsfiddle.
If your variables are global (they should not), they are also automatically enclosed within window object, so you can call them also like that: window[string].alert(). This will not work for non-global functions (in this case my solution seems to be the only one not using eval()).

eval("alert('test');");
You can call functions with eval. Even you can declare functions.
eval("function test(){ alert("test");}");
test();

Javascript OOP best practices? [closed]

As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 9 years ago.
I'm sick of seeing dozens of different ways of doing object oriented programming in Javascript. Can anyone just tell me which technique I should use considering I want to work on a large scale project and I want my code to be future proof?

These are just a few quick guidelines I've come up with, if anyone else has anything meaningful to add, I've set this answer as a community wiki so it should be easy enough for you to edit.
Namespace your objects to ensure they will never conflict with third party JavaScript libraries.
window['Andrew']['JS'] = {
addEvent: function(el,evName) {/*Stuff*/},
Rectangle: function(width,height) {/*Stuff*/}
};
So then you would create a rectangle object by using:
var myRect = new Andrew.JS.Rectangle(14,11);
And then your code will never interfere with, or be interfered by anybody else's Rectangle.
Use a consistent naming strategy, specifically:
Object names should be capitalized, everything else (variables, functions) should begin with a lower case character i.e.
var myRect = new Andrew.JS.Rectangle(14,11);
document.write(myRect.getArea());
Ensure everything is meaningful, i.e. verbs for methods, nouns + adjectives for parameters.
Make sure all methods and parameters are relevant to the object they belong to. e.g.
In this example, the area of the rectangle can be converted to square feet using the method inSquareFeet().
myRect.getAreaObject().inSquareFeet();
Make sure inSquareFeet is a method of the object returned by getAreaObject() and not a method of Andrew.JS.Rectangle
Use constructors, or more specifically, try as hard as possible to make sure that an object doesn't need any further initialization to be used once it has been constructed, so instead of:
var Person = function()
{
this.name = "";
this.sayHello = function ()
{
alert(this.name + " says 'Hello!'");
return this;
}
}
var bob = new Person();
bob.name = "Bob Poulton";
bob.sayHello();
try:
var Person = function(name)
{
this.name = name;
this.sayHello = function ()
{
alert(this.name + " says 'Hello!'");
return this;
}
}
var bob = new Person("Bob Poulton");
bob.sayHello();

I always use John resig's:
http://ejohn.org/blog/simple-javascript-inheritance/
It's simple and doesn't require any frameworks to function.

Because you are working on a large scale project i would suggestion a javascript framework like mootools http://mootools.net/.
It has a good class and inheritance structure.

My ideal Object for OOP is like using an Instance method with prototypes:
Example:
var Users = function()
{
var _instance;
this.prototype.getUsername = function(){/*...*/}
this.prototype.getFirstname = function(){/*...*/}
this.prototype.getSecurityHash = function(){/*...*/}
/*...*/
/*Static Methods as such*/
return { /*Return a small Object*/
GetInstance : function()
{
if(_instance == null)
{
_instnance = new Users(arguments);
}
return _instnance; //Return the object
},
New: function()
{
_instnance = null; //unset It
return this.GetInstnace(arguments);
}
}
}
Then I would always use like:
Firstname = Users.GetInstance('Robert','Pitt').getFirstname();
Username = Users.GetInstance().getUsername(); //Returns the above object.
Me = Users.New('Robert',null); //Deletes the above object and creates a new instance.
Father = Users.New('Peter','Piper'); //New Object
Me.AddFather(Father); //Me Object.
And that's the kind of road i go down when it comes to building a JavaScript OO Style architecture.

just for your information, i think YUI provides few great tutorials on this topic

//Create and define Global NameSpace Object
( function(GlobalObject, $, undefined)
{
GlobalObject.Method = function()
{
///<summary></summary>
}
GlobalObject.Functionality = {};
}) (GlobalObject = GlobalObject || {}, jQuery);
//New object for specific functionality
( function(Events, $, undefined)
{
//Member Variables
var Variable; // (Used for) , (type)
// Initialize
Events.Init = function()
{
///<summary></summary>
}
// public method
Events.PublicMethod = function(oParam)
{
///<summary></summary>
///<param type=""></param>
}
// protected method (typically define in global object, but can be made available from here)
GlobalObject.Functionality.ProtectedMethod = function()
{
///<summary></summary>
}
// internal method (typically define in global object, but can be made available from here)
GlobalObject.InternalMethod = function()
{
///<summary></summary>
}
// private method
var privateMethod = function()
{
///<summary></summary>
}
}) (GlobalObject.Funcitonality.Events = GlobalObject.Funcitonality.Events || {}, jQuery )
// Reusable "class" object
var oMultiInstanceClass = function()
{
// Memeber Variables again
var oMember = null; //
// Public method
this.Init = function(oParam)
{
oMember = oParam;
for ( n = 1; i < oMemeber.length; i += 1 )
{
new this.SubClass.Init(oMember[i]); // you get the point, yeah?
}
}
this.Subclass = function()
{
this.Init = function() { }
}
}
The strength to this is that it initializes the Global object automatically, allows you to maintain the integrity of your code, and organizes each piece of functionality into a specific grouping by your definition.
This structure is solid, presenting all of the basic syntactical things you would expect from OOP without the key words.
There are even some ingenious ways to set up interfaces as well. If you choose to go that far, a simple search will give you some good tutorials and tips.
Even setting up intellisense is possible with javascript and visual studio, and then defining each piece and referencing them makes writing javascript cleaner and more manageable.
Using these three methods as needed by your situation helps keep the global namespace clean, keep your code organized and maintains separation of concerns for each object.. if used correctly. Remember, Object Oriented Design is of no use if you don't utilize the logic behind using objects!

function foo() {
var bar = function() { console.log("i'm a private method"); return 1; };
var iAmAPrivateVariable = 1;
return {
publicMethod: function() { alert(iAmAPrivateVariable); },
publicVariable: bar()
}
}
//usage
var thing = foo()
This is a functional approach, and has a great deal more going for it (such as encapsulation) then anything else you are going to see
In a general way, you shouldn't be doing OO in javascript, it isn't that great a language for it for a great many reasons. Think scheme with squiggly brackets and semi-colons, and you will start writing the language like the pros do. That being said, sometime OO is a better fit. In those cases, the above is typically the best bet
to bring inheritance into the mix
function parent() {
return { parentVariable: 2 };
}
function foo() {
var bar = function() { console.log("i'm a private method"); return 1; };
var iAmAPrivateVariable = 1;
me = parent();
me.publicMethod = function() { alert(iAmAPrivateVariable); };
me.publicVariable = bar();
return me;
}
This makes things a tad more complected, but accomplishes the desired end result while still taking a functional approach to OO concepts (in this case, using decorator functions instead of real inheritance). What I like about the whole approach is we are still really treating objects the way they are intended to be in this kind of language -- a property bag you can attach stuff to at will.
Another note is this is wildly different then what you will see most of the time in most of the jobs you will ever work at, and often is very hard to explain a) what is going on, and b) why it is a good idea to coworkers.

I use such a pattern and recommend to you to use it too:
function Person(firstname, lastname, age)
{
var self = this;
var _ = {};
// Private members.
var firstname = firstname;
var lastname = lastname;
var age = age || 'unknown';
// Private methods.
function first_letter_to_uppercase(str) {
return str.charAt(0).toUpperCase() + str.substr(1);
}
// Public members and methods.
_.get_age = function()
{
return age;
}
_.get_name = function()
{
return first_letter_to_uppercase(firstname) + ' ' +
first_letter_to_uppercase(lastname);
}
return _;
}
var p = new Person('vasya', 'pupkin', 23);
alert("It's " + p.get_name() + ', he is ' + p.get_age() + ' years old.')

You can try with a simple, usefull and quick object:
var foo = {
foo1: null,
foo2: true,
foo3: 24,
foo4: new Array(),
nameOfFunction1: function(){
alert("foo1");
},
nameOfFunction2: function(){
alert("foo2");
},
}
To use this, you have to create an instance of this object and use like a object in java:
foo.nameOfFunction2();
Also you can check this link to other solution: http://www.javascriptkit.com/javatutors/oopjs.shtml
I hope that answer your question.

Object Creation in javascript

Just for the kicks i am trying to create a simple data object in javascript. Here is the code.
var roverObject = function(){
var newRover = {};
var name;
var xCord;
var ycord;
var direction;
newRover.setName = function(newName) {
name = newName;
};
newRover.getName = function() {
return name;
};
newRover.setDirection = function(newDirection) {
direction = newDirection;
};
newRover.getDirection = function() {
return direction;
};
newRover.setXCord = function(newXCord) {
xCord = newXCord;
};
newRover.getXCord = function() {
return xCord;
};
newRover.setYCord = function(newYCord) {
yCord = newYCord;
};
newRover.getYCord = function() {
return yCord;
};
newRover.where = function(){
return "Rover :: "+ name +" is at Location("+xCord+","+yCord+") pointing to "+direction;
};
return newRover;
};
rover1 = new roverObject();
rover2 = new roverObject();
rover1.setName("Mars Rover");
rover1.setDirection("NORTH");
rover1.setXCord(2);
rover1.setYCord(2);
console.log(rover1.where());
console.log(rover1);
rover2.setName("Moon Rover");
rover2.setDirection("SOUTH");
rover2.setXCord(1);
rover2.setYCord(1);
console.log(rover2.where());
console.log(rover2);
There are few questions that I have around this creation.
I want to create an object where the properties/attributes of object are private and not visible to world. Am I successful in doing that? Can I really not access the object attributes?
Is there a better way to create this kind of object?
If I want to inherit this object, I should do a newObject.prototype = roverObjectwill that work? And will that make sense most of all.
Finally I have a wierd problem. Notice the last method of objet "where" which returns a concatenated string. Here I tried following code instead.
newRover.where = function(){
return "Rover :: "+ name +" is at Location("+xCord+","+yCord+") pointing to "+direction;
}();
and then did a following console.log
console.log(rover1.where);
console.log(rover2.where);
It threw following error for me:
cannot access optimized closure
Why would it say that? What am I doing wrong?
Thanks for all the help. Any review comments would be appreciated too!
Cheers

Am I successful in doing that? Can I really not access the object attributes?
Indeed. You don't have object attributes, you have local variables in the roverObject function. Local variables can't be accessed from outside, only from the functions inside the roverObject function that have a closure over them.
That you are calling roverObject as a constructor, with new roverObject, is irrelevant, as you are returning a different object from the function. Saying var rover1= roverObject() without the new would do exactly the same thing. Notably the object returned by [new] roverObject is a plain Object as you created it from {}; rover1 instanceof roverObject is false.
If you wanted instanceof to work, you would have to call with new, and use this instead of newRover in the constructor function.
If I want to inherit this object, I should do a newObject.prototype = roverObject will that work? And will that make sense most of all.
No. You currently have no allowance for prototyping. You are using a separate copy of each method for each instance of the roverObject. You can do certainly objects this way but it's a different approach than prototyping. If you wanted to make something like a subclass of roverObject in the arrangement you have now, you'd say something like:
function AdvancedRover() {
var rover= new roverObject();
rover.doResearch= function() {
return rover.where()+' and is doing advanced research';
};
return rover;
}
Note since the ‘private’ local variables in the base class constructor really are private, even the subclass cannot get at them. There's no ‘protected’.
newRover.where = function(){ ... }();
What's that trying to do? I can't get the error you do; all the above does is assigns the string with the location to where (before the setter methods have been called, so it's full of undefineds).
Is there a better way to create this kind of object?
Maybe. see this question for a discussion of class/instance strategies in JavaScript.

Q1: you can create 'private' members in javascript 'classes'. In javascript, privacy is not determined by any access specifier. Instead, access needs to be specifically instrumented. Example:
function MyClass() {
this.val = 100; // public;
var privateVal = 200;
function getVal() { return this.val; } // private method;
this.getPrivateVal = function() { // public method, accessor to private variable
return privateVal;
}
}
Object scope in javascript is governed by a queer concept called closures. AFAIK, there is no parallel concept in any other popular launguage like C+/Java etc.
While I understand what closures are, I cannot put it in words. Perhaps a demonstration will help you:
function closureDemo() {
var done=false;
function setDone() { done=true; }
doLater(setDone);
}
function doLater(func) { setTimeout(func,1000); }
closureDemo();
now, while setDone is called from within doLater, it can still access done in closureDemo, even though done is not in scope (in the conventional procedural sense).
I think you will understand more when you read this.
Q2: I can only say what I do; I don't know if it is better or not. If I wrote your code, it would look like this:
function RoverObject() {
var newRover = {}; // privates
var name;
var xCord;
var ycord;
var direction;
this.setName = function(newName) {
name = newName;
};
this.getName = function() {
return name;
};
this.setDirection = function(newDirection) {
direction = newDirection;
};
// and so on...
this.where = function(){
return "Rover :: "+ name +" is at Location("+xCord+","+yCord+") pointing to "+direction;
};
}
var rover1 = new RoverObject();
Points to note:
capitalization of "class name"'s first letter
use of this instead of roverObject
this function is a pure constructor. it returns nothing.
Q3: if you want to do inheritance, then my method (use of this) will not work. Instead, the public methods should be a part of the prototype of RoverObject. Read this. Excellent material.
Hope that helps.
EDIT: There is a problem with the way your code is doing work. Problems:
your function does not do what its name suggests. Its name had better be createRoverObject, because that's exactly what it is doing. It is not working like a class constructor
the methods supported by your class are part of the object, but the data members are not. While this may work (and it is not, as your console.log() problem suggests), it is not a good way to implement a class in javascript. The problem here is of closures. Again, i'm unable to articulate what the problem specifically is, but I can smell it.

With regards to 4. - you are trying to log the function, not the result of calling the function. Should be console.log(rover1.where()); My guess firebug(I assume it's firebug's console.log) does not like to log function definitions.
EDIT Oh I get it, you are actually executing the where funcion when you assign rover.where. Are you trying to get what looks like a property to actually be a function? If that's the case it won't work. It will have to be a function if you want it to be evaluated when it's called.
What happens in you case where gets executed in the constructor function. At that point you are still creating the roverObject closure and hence it's too early to access it's private variables.

This is just addressing point 1 of your post.
Here's a good article on javascript private members and more:
Private Members in JavaScript

Defining your object like this gives you private members.
function RolloverObject() {
var name;
var xCord;
var ycord;
var direction;
this.setName = function(newName) { name = newName; };
this.getName = function() { return name; };
this.setDirection = function(newDirection) { direction = newDirection; };
this.getDirection = function() { return direction; };
this.setXCord = function(newXCord) { xCord = newXCord; };
this.getXCord = function() { return xCord; };
this.setYCord = function(newYCord) { yCord = newYCord; };
this.getYCord = function() { return yCord; };
this.where = function() {
return "Rover :: " + name + " is at Location(" + xCord + "," + yCord + ") pointing to " + direction;
};
}
var rolloverObject = new RolloverObject();