Self Executing Function in Constructor Pattern - javascript

I came across the following pattern recently:
/* PATTERN 1 */
(function(window) {
var Stuff = (function() { // Variable assignment and self-invoking anonymous function
function Stuff(params) {
this.items = [];
}
Stuff.prototype = {
someMethod1: function() {
},
someMethod2: function() {
}
};
return Stuff;
}()); // END Variable assignment
Stuff.create = function(params) {
return new Stuff(params);
};
window.Stuff = Stuff;
}(window));
What confuses me is the role that assigning the Stuff variable plays. Specifically, how is this pattern operationally different to the following:
/* PATTERN 2 */
(function(window) {
// No variable assignment or self-invoking anonymous function
function Stuff(params) {
this.items = [];
}
Stuff.prototype = {
someMethod1: function() {
},
someMethod2: function() {
}
};
Stuff.create = function(params) {
return new Stuff(params);
};
window.Stuff = Stuff;
}(window));
Is the scope of pattern 1's prototype methods private in some way that pattern 2's prototype methods aren't?
Is this purely a stylistic approach for more clearly separating business logic?

No difference at all. The inner IIFE is totally pointless, as it doesn't have any local variables, and can be safely omitted. The only (little) difference is that Stuff in the outer IIFE is now a function declaration, not a function assigned to a variable.
Of course, as it stands, the outer IEFE is quite useless as well, except maybe for code organisation.

Both patterns allows you to easily create true private variables that are attached to the Stuff "class", but can't be accessed outside of it:
var Stuff = (function() { // Variable assignment and self-invoking anonymous function
var stuff_private = "stuff";
function Stuff(params) {
this.items = [];
}
Stuff.prototype = {
someMethod1: function() {
},
someMethod2: function() {
}
getStuff: function() {
return stuff_private;
}
};
return Stuff;
}()); // END Variable assignment
stuff_private is now embedded in the scope of Stuff, but it's invisible to the outside world. You could do this in the second pattern as well, but if you were creating multiple classes in the same file, each with their own private variables, then the first pattern might make sense.

Related

prototype on single instances of functions

If I know that I only will create one instance of the MyClass function below, which of my two snippets below would you prefer? Should I stick with the latter, even though I know that I'll only create one instance of the function?
I know that prototype is useful from a performance perspective when sharing methods across all instances of a function, but in this case I would like to hear your input.
var MyClass = (function () {
var cls = function () { };
cls.prototype = {
init: function(data){
}
};
return cls;
})();
vs
var MyClass = (function () {
var cls = function () {
this.init = function(data){
}
};
return cls;
})();
Your second code snippet is a syntax error, you're trying to put a property initializer where a statement is expected. (Not anymore)
If you're only going to have a single object that you need the init function on, then:
var MyObject = {
init: function(data) {
// ...
}
};
Then you don't even need to call a function to create it, it's already there.
If you want to have truly private variables and such (which I assume is the reason for your outer anonymous functions), then:
var MyObject = (function() {
var trulyPrivateDataHere;
return {
init: function(data) {
// ...
}
};
})();
I prefer this because it's clear and direct: You're creating the actual object. I don't see any need for a constructor function if you're only ever going to create a single instance.
But if it has to be a constructor function, I guess I'd very marginally prefer your second option, because it's simpler, and simple is good barring the need for complexity.

JavaScript: How do use instance variables

why doesn't this work as expected. (see expected comment)
var Module = function () {
var public_instance_var;
function doStuff () {
Module.doOtherStuff();
console.log(public_instance_var); // expected: true, but logs undefined
};
function doOtherStuff() {
public_instance_var = true;
};
return {
public_instance_var: instance_var,
doStuff: doStuff,
doOtherStuff: doOtherStuff
}
}();
Module.doStuff();
Update: Fixed accordingly to a few of jAndy suggestions
Multiple errors here:
You don't return DoStuff as module interface
instance_var is not declared, probably meant public_instance_var
doOtherStuff is never assigned to Module, just call it like doOtherStuff();
Fixed code:
var Module = function () {
var public_instance_var;
function doStuff() {
doOtherStuff();
console.log(public_instance_var); // expected: true, but logs undefined
};
function doOtherStuff() {
public_instance_var = true;
};
return {
doStuff: doStuff,
public_instance_var: public_instance_var
}
}();
Module.doStuff();
change your code like so
var Module = function () {
var public_instance_var;
function doStuff () {
doOtherStuff();
console.log("var is ", public_instance_var); // expected: true, but logs undefined
};
function doOtherStuff() {
public_instance_var = true;
};
return {
public_instance_var: public_instance_var,
doStuff : doStuff
}
}();
Module.doStuff();
you have to return doStuff() function (otherwise outside it will be undefined) and public_instance_var instead of instance_var
you need to execute doOtherStuff() without prefixing Module.
What this code does is, simply put: create and run a function and assign its return value to a variable: Module. The return value is an object with 1 property: public_instance_var, that points to the variable instance_var, or (after correcting the typo: public_instance_var). This variable was declared, but not instantiated. Therefore the return value looks like this:
Module.public_instance_var = undefined
The very last line Module.doStuff(); won't work one bit: Module is an object that has no methods. The functions you declared are garbage collected when the anonymous function returns. If you want access to those functions, you'll need to include them in the return statement. Read up on closures, Object constructors and design patterns in general, but I'd say the code you're after will look something like this:
var Module = (function()
var public_instance_var;
function doStuff () {
this.doOtherStuff();
console.log(public_instance_var); // expected: true, but logs undefined
};
function doOtherStuff() {
public_instance_var = true;
};
return {
public_instance_var: public_instance_var,
doStuff: doStuff,
doOtherStuff: doOtherStuff
};
})();
Of course, this way your variable public_instance_var is a public property, so my guess would be what you're really trying to do is simulate a private properties and methods. In which case you might end up with code similar to this:
var Module = (function()
{
var public_instance_var;
return {
//public_instance_var: public_instance_var, remove this line
//the closure will preserve access to the variable
doStuff: function ()
{
this.doOtherStuff();//this, you're referencing the object's property
console.log('here I am');
},
doOtherStuff: function ()
{
public_instance_var = true;
//this won't work anymore:
//this.public_instance_var = true;
};
}
})();
Module.doStuff() now logs here I am, but the doOtherStuff is now a public method, too. Here's how you might choose to solve the issue:
var Module = (function()
{
var public_instance_var;
function doOtherStuff ()
{
public_instance_var = true;
};
return {
//public_instance_var: public_instance_var, remove this line
//the closure will preserve access to the variable
doStuff: function ()
{
doOtherStuff();//don't use this here, but the reference to the function exists thanks to closure
console.log('here I am');
console.log(public_instance_var);//logs true
}
};
})();
These are just a few of the very powerful things you can do with closures and functions returning objects. Just read a couple of articles, like this one, there are better ones out there. Google the term power constructors

Javascript namespacing - is this particular method good practice?

I'm a javascript newbie, and I've come up with the following scheme for namespacing:
(function() {
var ns = Company.namespace("Company.Site.Module");
ns.MyClass = function() { .... };
ns.MyClass.prototype.coolFunction = function() { ... };
})();
Company.namespace is a function registered by a script which simply creates the chain of objects up to Module.
Outside, in non-global scope:
var my = new Company.Site.Module.MyClass();
I'm particularly asking about the method by which I hide the variable ns from global scope - by a wrapping anonymous function executed immediately. I could just write Company.Site.Module everywhere, but it's not DRY and a little messy compared to storing the ns in a local variable.
What say you? What pitfalls are there with this approach? Is there some other method that is considered more standard?
You dont need to scope classes like that, its only necessary if you have global variables outside of the class. I use this approach...
MyApp.MyClass = function() {
};
MyApp.MyClass.prototype = {
foo: function() {
}
};
Also note that I use a object literal for a cleaner prototype declaration
However if you need to scope global variables then you can do
(function() {
var scopedGlobalVariable = "some value";
MyApp.MyClass = function() {
};
MyApp.MyClass.prototype = function() {
foo: function() {
}
};
})();
Your approach looks fine to me.
However, you can also do this slightly different, by returning the "class" from the self-executing function:
Company.Site.Module.MyClass = (function() {
var MyClass = function() { ... };
MyClass.prototype.foo = function() { ... };
return MyClass;
})();
This strips at least all the ns. prefixes. The namespace function can still be utilized to create the objects, but outside of the self-executing function.

How do I access these JavaScript member functions from outside?

I know how to access the below member function when it's written like this:
var blady_blah=
{
some_member_function: function ()
{
}
}
I access it from outside doing blady_blah.some_member_function()
But how do I access the member function when it's written like this:
(function() {
some_member_function: function ()
{
}
})();
Braces, { }, are used to define both object literals and function bodies. The difference is:
var name = {}; // Object literal
Which you may also see written as
var name = {
};
That's just the same but with some space in between so it's still an object literal, and unfortunately it looks very similar to:
var name = function () { // Function body
};
An object can have members:
var name = {
member: "string"
};
Whereas a function cannot; a function has statements:
var name = function () {
do_something();
var result = do_something_else();
};
You can't write
var name = function () {
member: "string"
};
Because you've mixed the two uses of { } together.
A variable can be defined within a function, but it can't be seen outside the function - it's within the function scope:
var name = function () {
var something_useful = string;
};
The second example is a closure (it just happens to have a syntax error inside). Minus the bad syntax, your self-evaluating anonymous function looks like this:
(function() {
})();
If you'd like, you can define functions inside this that will be invisible to the outside world. This is useful if you're interested in maintaining a clean global namespace, for example with library code.
(function() {
function utilityFunctionFoo() {
}
function utilityFunctionBar() {
}
})();
Of course, if you'd like to call any of these functions from the outside world, you're out of luck. Or are you? Actually, there's another way to define a function:
var foo = function() {
}
That's exactly the same as writing:
function foo() {
}
...Except that when written in the second style, you can actually omit the var keyword and create a global variable! Bringing it all together:
(function() {
publicData = "stuff accessible from outside anonymous function";
var privateData = "stuff that stays inside anonymous function";
function utilityFunctionFoo() {
}
function utilityFunctionBar() {
}
usefulFunctionExport = function() {
utilityFunctionFoo();
utilityFunctionBar();
}
})();
usefulFunctionExport();
You can't access it after the function it's in terminates. It's a local variable that goes out of scope when its parent function ends.
You should make the main function be a constructor so that it returns a new instance of a class (you could name it Blahdy_blah) with the member function as one of its properties.
Look up constructors, their return values, and accessing member variables.
If you want to execute the function you need to return an object that exposes the function.
var LIB = (function() {
    var fn = {
member_function : function(){}
};
return fn;
})();
and to call
LIB.member_function();
(function() {
blady_blah.some_member_function();
})();
If you need to add stuff into it you would write it like this.
(function() {
blady_blah.some_member_function(function(){
// Do stuff...
});
})();

Initializing singleton javascript objects using the new operator?

In javascript, what is the difference between:
var singleton = function(){ ... }
and
var singleton = new function(){ ... }
?
Declaring priviliged functions as described by crockford (http://www.crockford.com/javascript/private.html) only works using the latter.
The difference is mainly that in your second example, you are using the Function Expression as a Constructor, the new operator will cause the function to be automatically executed, and the this value inside that function will refer to a newly created object.
If you don't return anything (or you don't return a non-primitive value) from that function, the this value will be returned and assigned to your singleton variable.
Privileged methods can also be used in your second example, a common pattern is use an immediately invoked function expression, creating a closure where the private members are accessible, then you can return an object that contains your public API, e.g.:
var singleton = (function () {
var privateVar = 1;
function privateMethod () {/*...*/}
return { // public API
publicMethod: function () {
// private members are available here
}
};
})();
I think that a privileged function as described by crockford would look like this:
function Test() {
this.privileged = function() {
alert('apple');
}
function anonymous() {
alert('hello');
}
anonymous();
}
t = new Test; // hello
t.privileged(); // apple
// unlike the anonymous function, the privileged function can be accessed and
// modified after its declaration
t.privileged = function() {
alert('orange');
}
t.privileged(); // orange

Categories

Resources