Develop Reference

How to assign a function to a object method in javascript?

I'd like to 'proxy' (not sure if that's the term at all) a function inside a function object for easy calling.
Given the following code
function Soldier() {
this.el = $("<div></div>").addClass('soldier');
this.pos = this.el.position; // $(".soldier").position(), or so I thought
}
In the console:
s = new Soldier();
$("#gamemap").append(s.el); // Add the soldier to the game field
s.pos === s.el.position // this returns true
s.el.position() // Returns Object {top: 0, left: 0}
s.pos() // Returns 'undefined'
What am I doing wrong in this scenario and is there an easy way to achieve my goal (s.pos() to return the result of s.el.position()) ?
I thought about s.pos = function() { return s.el.position(); } but looks a bit ugly and not apropriate. Also I'd like to add more similar functions and the library will become quite big to even load.

When you're calling s.pos(), its this context is lost.
You can simulate this behavior using call():
s.pos.call(s); // same as s.pos()
s.pos.call(s.el); // same as s.el.position()
This code is actually ok:
s.pos = function() { return s.el.position(); }
An alternative is using bind():
s.pos = s.el.position.bind(el);
You can use the prototype, that way the functions will not be created separately for every object:
Soldier.prototype.pos = function(){ return this.el.position(); }

I'd recommend to use the prototype:
Soldier.prototype.pos = function() { return this.el.position(); };
Not ugly at all, and quite performant actually.
If you want to directly assign it in the constructor, you'll need to notice that the this context of a s.pos() invocation would be wrong. You therefore would need to bind it:
…
this.pos = this.el.position.bind(this.el);

It's because the context of execution for position method has changed. If you bind the method to work inside the element context it will work.
JS Fiddle
function Soldier() {
this.el = $("<div></div>").addClass('soldier');
this.pos = this.el.position.bind(this.el);
}
var s = new Soldier();
$("#gamemap").append(s.el);
console.log(s.pos());

Store state of a JavaScript Object

Im trying to store the stats of 'this' in my javscript object so that later on in my application I can return 'this' to a previous state. I thought I could accomplish using a closure but so far I haven't successful. My idea was to do something like this
function SavedFeature() {
var self = this;
this.savedItem;
this.storeState = function() {
this.savedItem = storeClosure();
}
function storeClosure() {
var closure = self;
return function() {
return closure;
};
};
//other things the user can change...
}
so later on in my application if I needed to return to the point when I called storeState I could just do
//return the object I put in my closure
var backToNormal = savedFeature.savedItem();
that doesn't work though because any changes to my savedFeature object after I call storeState() are being reflected in the item im retrieving from called savedItem(). I'm guessing this is happening because closure is being set to a reference of self instead of copied to a new instance.
Is there anyway to store the state of my entire object in a closure like this or do I need to store this some other way.

The issue you are running into is that in js objects are passed by reference. This means that all changes performed on your object will apply to your obj.savedItem property.
Fix: Store a deep clone into obj.savedItem
this.storeState = function() {
this.savedItem = _.cloneDeep(this); // or _.clone(this, true);
}
cloneDeep is a lodash method, most js libs supply one of their own, e.g. jQuery's $.extend, etc.
You could easily roll your own deep clone function, look up the options on this thread.
A complete example with jQuery:
function SavedFeature() {
this.savedItem;
this.clone = function() {
return $.extend(true, {}, this);
},
this.storeState = function() {
this.savedItem = this.clone();
}
}
Doing it this way allows you adapt to different environments by changing your clone method as it is facading the used library method.

There are dozens of ways how to implement it. I will do just simple one. saving property.
Take into account if you want to save entire object you need to do deep copy of the object.
this is your feature:
function SavedFeature() {
this.savedItem = {'isNew': true};
this.stateMachine = new StateMachine();
}
this is some kind of state machine:
function StateMachine () {
var state = { 'isNew' : null};
function set(newState) {
state.isNew = newState.isNew;
}
function get() {
return state.isNew;
}
return {
get : get,
set : set
};
}
which, know how to store isNew property
and a working sample:
var savedFeature = new SavedFeature();
console.log(savedFeature.savedItem); // true by default
savedFeature.stateMachine.set(savedFeature.savedItem); // saving state.
savedFeature.savedItem.isNew = false; // modifying state
console.log(savedFeature.savedItem); // return false, because of statement above
var restoredState = savedFeature.stateMachine.get(); // restoring state
console.log(restoredState); // true
savedFeature.savedItem.isNew = restoredState.isNew;
console.log(savedFeature.savedItem); // true
you can adjust that code, and reach functionality whatever you need. hope that helps

need help understanding closures usage in this code

Here is a simplified snippet from some code I wrote for managing tablet gestures on canvas elements
first a function that accepts an element and a dictionary of callbacks and register the events plus adding other features like 'hold' gestures:
function registerStageGestures(stage, callbacks, recieverArg) {
stage.inhold = false;
stage.timer = null;
var touchduration = 1000;
var reciever = recieverArg || window;
stage.onLongTouch = function(e) {
if (stage.timer) clearTimeout(stage.timer);
stage.inhold = true;
if (callbacks.touchholdstart) callbacks.touchholdstart.call(reciever, e);
};
stage.getContent().addEventListener('touchstart', function(e) {
e.preventDefault();
calcTouchEventData(e);
stage.timer = setTimeout(function() {
stage.onLongTouch(e);
}, touchduration);
if (callbacks.touchstart) callbacks.touchholdstart.call(reciever, e);
});
stage.getContent().addEventListener('touchmove', function(e) {
e.preventDefault();
if (stage.timer) clearTimeout(stage.timer);
if (stage.inhold) {
if (callbacks.touchholdmove) callbacks.touchholdmove.call(reciever, e);
} else {
if (callbacks.touchmove) callbacks.touchmove.call(reciever, e);
}
});
stage.getContent().addEventListener('touchend', function(e) {
e.preventDefault();
if (stage.timer) clearTimeout(stage.timer);
if (stage.inhold) {
if (callbacks.touchholdend) callbacks.touchholdend.call(reciever, e);
} else {
if (callbacks.touchend) callbacks.touchend.call(reciever, e);
}
stage.inhold = false;
});
}
later I call registerStageGestures on a few elements (represented by 'View' objects) in the same page. Something like:
function View() {
var self=this;
..
function InitView() {
...
registerStageGestures(kineticStage, {
touchstart: function(e) {
// do something
},
touchmove: function(e) {
// do something
},
touchendunction(e) {
// do something
},
touchholdstart: function(e) {
// do something
},
touchholdmove: function(e) {
// do something
},
touchholdend: function(e) {
// do something
},
}, self);
Everything works fine, however I'm left wondering about two things in the implementation of registerStageGestures:
First, is it necessary to make inhold, timer and onLongTouch members of the stage ? or will closures make everything works well if they are local vars in registerStageGestures ?
Second, is it necessary to call the callbacks with '.call(receiver,' syntax ? I'm doing this to make sure the callback code will run in the context of the View but I'm not sure if it's needed ?
any input is much appreciated
Thanks!

First, is it necessary to make inhold, timer and onLongTouch members
of the stage ? or will closures make everything works well if they are
local vars in registerStageGestures ?
As far as registerStageGestures() is concerned, var inhold, var timer and function onLongTouch(e) {...}. would suffice. The mechanism by which an inner function has automatic access to its outer function's members is known as "closure". You would only need to set stage.inhold, stage.timer and stage.onLongTouch if some other piece of code needs access to these settings as properties of stage.
Second, is it necessary to call the callbacks with '.call(receiver,'
syntax ? I'm doing this to make sure the callback code will run in the
context of the View but I'm not sure if it's needed ?
Possibly, depending on how those callbacks are written. .call() and .apply() are sometimes used when calling functions that use this internally. In both cases, the first parameter passed defines the object to be interpreted as this. Thus, javascript gives you the means of defining general purpose methods with no a priori assumption about the object to which those methods will apply when called. Similarly, you can call a method of an object in such a way that it acts on another object.
EDIT:
For completeness, please note that even in the absence of this in a function, .apply() can be very useful as it allows multiple parameters to be specified as elements of a single array, eg the ubiquitous jQuery.when.apply(null, arrayOfPromises)...

There are some simple answers, here.
First, closure:
Closure basically says that whatever is defined inside of a function, has access to the rest of that function's contents.
And all of those contents are guaranteed to stay alive (out of the trash), until there are no more objects left, which ere created inside.
A simple test:
var testClosure = function () {
var name = "Bob",
recallName = function () { return name; };
return { getName : recallName };
};
var test = testClosure();
console.log(test.getName()); // Bob
So anything that was created inside can be accessed by any function which was also created inside (or created inside of a function created in a function[, ...], inside).
var closure_2x = function () {
var name = "Bob",
innerScope = function () {
console.log(name);
return function () {
console.log("Still " + name);
}
};
return innerScope;
};
var inner_func = closure_2x();
var even_deeper = inner_func(); // "Bob"
even_deeper(); // "Still Bob"
This applies not only to variables/objects/functions created inside, but also to function arguments passed inside.
The arguments have no access to the inner-workings(unless passed to methods/callbacks), but the inner-workings will remember the arguments.
So as long as your functions are being created in the same scope as your values (or a child-scope), there's access.
.call is trickier.
You know what it does (replaces this inside of the function with the object you pass it)...
...but why and when, in this case are harder.
var Person = function (name, age) {
this.age = age;
this.getAge = function () {
return this.age;
};
};
var bob = new Person("Bob", 32);
This looks pretty normal.
Honestly, this could look a lot like Java or C# with a couple of tweaks.
bob.getAge(); // 32
Works like Java or C#, too.
doSomething.then(bob.getAge);
? Buh ?
We've now passed Bob's method into a function, as a function, all by itself.
var doug = { age : 28 };
doug.getAge = bob.getAge;
Now we've given doug a reference to directly use bobs methid -- not a copy, but a pointer to the actual method.
doug.getAge(); // 28
Well, that's odd.
What about what came out of passing it in as a callback?
var test = bob.getAge;
test(); // undefined
The reason for this, is, as you said, about context...
But the specific reason is because this inside of a function in JS isn't pre-compiled, or stored...
this is worked out on the fly, every time the function is called.
If you call
obj.method();
this === obj;
If you call
a.b.c.d();
this === a.b.c;
If you call
var test = bob.getAge;
test();
...?
this is equal to window.
In "strict mode" this doesn't happen (you get errors really quickly).
test.call(bob); //32
Balance restored!
Mostly...
There are still a few catches.
var outerScope = function () {
console.log(this.age);
var inner = function () {
console.log("Still " + this.age);
};
inner();
};
outerScope.call(bob);
// "32"
// "Still undefined"
This makes sense, when you think about it...
We know that if a function figures out this at the moment it's called -- scope has nothing to do with it...
...and we didn't add inner to an object...
this.inner = inner;
this.inner();
would have worked just fine (but now you just messed with an external object)...
So inner saw this as window.
The solution would either be to use .call, or .apply, or to use function-scoping and/or closure
var person = this,
inner = function () { console.log(person.age); };
The rabbit hole goes deeper, but my phone is dying...

Variable scope in Javascript Object

I'm discovering the concept of "objects" in JavaScript. I'm making an RSS Parser, and I have an error (commented).
function MyParser (feed_url) { // Construct
"use strict";
this.feedUrl = feed_url;
this.pubArray = [];
if (typeof (this.init_ok) == 'undefined') {
MyParser.prototype.parse = function () {
"use strict";
var thisObj = this;
$.get(this.feedUrl, function (data, textStatus, jqXHR) {
if (textStatus == 'success') {
var xml = jqXHR.responseXML,
//lastBuildDate = new Date($(xml).find('lastBuildDate').text());
items = $(xml).find('item');
items.each(function () {
var pubSingle = thisObj.makeObj($(this).find('pubDate').text(),
$(this).find('link').text(),
$(this).find('title').text(),
$(this).find('description').text(),
$(this).find('encoded').text(),
$(this).find('commentRss').text(),
$(this).find('comments').last().text());
thisObj.pubArray.push(pubSingle);
});
console.log(thisObj.pubArray); // OK
}
}, 'xml');
console.log(this.pubArray); // Empty
return (this.pubArray);
};
MyParser.prototype.makeObj = function (pubDate, pubLink, pubTitle, pubDesc, pubContent, pubComCount, pubComLink) {
"use strict";
var pubSingle = {};
pubSingle.pubDate = new Date(pubDate);
pubSingle.pubLink = pubLink;
pubSingle.pubTitle = pubTitle;
pubSingle.pubDesc = pubDesc;
pubSingle.pubContent = pubContent;
pubSingle.pubComCount = pubComCount;
pubSingle.pubComLink = pubComLink;
return (pubSingle);
};
}
this.init_ok = true;
}
If you look at the console.log(), you'll see that the line // OK is outputting my array correctly.
But later, when returning from $.get, my array is empty.
Does anybody have an idea why, and how to correct that please?

This is not a problem with variable-scope. The problem here is that you're working with asynchronous flow and you're not thinking correctly the flow.
Let me explain:
When you do your .get, you fire a parallel asynchronous process that will request information from the browser, but your main program's flow keeps going, so when you get to your "return" statement, your array has not been filled yet with the response from your get method.
You should use your array from inside the get callback and not outside of it, since you can't guarantee that the array will have the information you need.
Does it make any sense?
Let me know!
Further explanation
According to your comments, you're still doing something like this:
var results = MyParser(feed_url);
//code that uses results.pubArray
And you cannot do that. Even though you're setting your "pubArray" inside your .get callback, you're trying to use pubArray right after you called MyParser and that's before the .get callback is called.
What you have to do, is call your next step on your program's logic from within the .get callback... that's the only way you can be sure that the pubArray is filled with proper data.
I hope that makes it clearer.

This is because your line
console.log(this.pubArray); // Empty
is being called directly after you issue your Ajax request; it hasn't had time to fetch the data yet. The line
console.log(thisObj.pubArray); // OK
is being called inside the Ajax callback, by which time the data has been fetched.

Thank you all, and particulary #Deleteman .
Here is what I did:
$.get(this.feedUrl, 'xml').success(function () {
thisObj.handleAjax(arguments[0], arguments[1], arguments[2]);
$(document).trigger('MyParserDone');
}).error(function () {
$(document).trigger('MyParserFailed');
});
Then, when i enter "HandleAjax", i'm back in my object context, so "this" refers to my object and the right properties. The only "problem" is that I have to set a listener (MyParserDone) to make sure the parsing is finished.

Functional object basics. How to go beyond simple containers?

On the upside I'm kinda bright, on the downside I'm wracked with ADD. If I have a simple example, that fits with what I already understand, I get it. I hope someone here can help me get it.
I've got a page that, on an interval, polls a server, processes the data, stores it in an object, and displays it in a div. It is using global variables, and outputing to a div defined in my html. I have to get it into an object so I can create multiple instances, pointed at different servers, and managing their data seperately.
My code is basically structured like this...
HTML...
<div id="server_output" class="data_div"></div>
JavaScript...
// globals
var server_url = "http://some.net/address?client=Some+Client";
var data = new Object();
var since_record_id;
var interval_id;
// window onload
window.onload(){
getRecent();
interval_id = setInterval(function(){
pollForNew();
}, 300000);
}
function getRecent(){
var url = server_url + '&recent=20';
// do stuff that relies on globals
// and literal reference to "server_output" div.
}
function pollForNew(){
var url = server_url + '&since_record_id=' + since_record_id;
// again dealing with globals and "server_output".
}
How would I go about formatting that into an object with the globals defined as attributes, and member functions(?) Preferably one that builds its own output div on creation, and returns a reference to it. So I could do something like...
dataOne = new MyDataDiv('http://address/?client');
dataOne.style.left = "30px";
dataTwo = new MyDataDiv('http://different/?client');
dataTwo.style.left = "500px";
My code is actually much more convoluted than this, but I think if I could understand this, I could apply it to what I've already got. If there is anything I've asked for that just isn't possible please tell me. I intend to figure this out, and will. Just typing out the question has helped my ADD addled mind get a better handle on what I'm actually trying to do.
As always... Any help is help.
Thanks
Skip
UPDATE:
I've already got this...
$("body").prepend("<div>text</div>");
this.test = document.body.firstChild;
this.test.style.backgroundColor = "blue";
That's a div created in code, and a reference that can be returned. Stick it in a function, it works.
UPDATE AGAIN:
I've got draggable popups created and manipulated as objects with one prototype function. Here's the fiddle. That's my first fiddle! The popups are key to my project, and from what I've learned the data functionality will come easy.

This is pretty close:
// globals
var pairs = {
{ div : 'div1', url : 'http://some.net/address?client=Some+Client' } ,
{ div : 'div2', url : 'http://some.net/otheraddress?client=Some+Client' } ,
};
var since_record_id; //?? not sure what this is
var intervals = [];
// window onload
window.onload(){ // I don't think this is gonna work
for(var i; i<pairs.length; i++) {
getRecent(pairs[i]);
intervals.push(setInterval(function(){
pollForNew(map[i]);
}, 300000));
}
}
function getRecent(map){
var url = map.url + '&recent=20';
// do stuff here to retrieve the resource
var content = loadResoucrce(url); // must define this
var elt = document.getElementById(map.div);
elt.innerHTML = content;
}
function pollForNew(map){
var url = map.url + '&since_record_id=' + since_record_id;
var content = loadResoucrce(url); // returns an html fragment
var elt = document.getElementById(map.div);
elt.innerHTML = content;
}
and the html obviously needs two divs:
<div id='div1' class='data_div'></div>
<div id='div2' class='data_div'></div>
Your 'window.onload` - I don't think that's gonna work, but maybe you have it set up correctly and didn't want to bother putting in all the code.
About my suggested code - it defines an array in the global scope, an array of objects. Each object is a map, a dictionary if you like. These are the params for each div. It supplies the div id, and the url stub. If you have other params that vary according to div, put them in the map.
Then, call getRecent() once for each map object. Inside the function you can unwrap the map object and get at its parameters.
You also want to set up that interval within the loop, using the same parameterization. I myself would prefer to use setTimeout(), but that's just me.
You need to supply the loadResource() function that accepts a URL (string) and returns the HTML available at that URL.
This solves the problem of modularity, but it is not "an object" or class-based approach to the problem. I'm not sure why you'd want one with such a simple task. Here's a crack an an object that does what you want:
(function() {
var getRecent = function(url, div){
url = url + '&recent=20';
// do stuff here to retrieve the resource
var content = loadResoucrce(url); // must define this
var elt = document.getElementById(div);
elt.innerHTML = content;
}
var pollForNew = function(url, div){
url = url + '&since_record_id=' + since_record_id;
var content = loadResoucrce(url); // returns an html fragment
var elt = document.getElementById(div);
elt.innerHTML = content;
}
UpdatingDataDiv = function(map) {
if (! (this instanceof arguments.callee) ) {
var error = new Error("you must use new to instantiate this class");
error.source = "UpdatingDataDiv";
throw error;
}
this.url = map.url;
this.div = map.div;
this.interval = map.interval || 30000; // default 30s
var self = this;
getRecent(this.url, this.div);
this.intervalId = setInterval(function(){
pollForNew(self.url, self.div);
}, this.interval);
};
UpdatingDataDiv.prototype.cancel = function() {
if (this.intervalId) {
clearInterval(this.intervalId);
this.intervalId = null;
}
}
})();
var d1= new UpdatingDataDiv('div1','http://some.net/address?client=Some+Client');
var d2= new UpdatingDataDiv('div2','http://some.net/otheraddress?client=Some+Client');
...
d1.cancel();
But there's not a lot you can do with d1 and d2. You can invoke cancel() to stop the updating. I guess you could add more functions to extend its capability.

OK, figured out what I needed. It's pretty straight forward.
First off disregard window.onload, the object is defined as a function and when you instantiate a new object it runs the function. Do your setup in the function.
Second, for global variables that you wish to make local to your object, simply define them as this.variable_name; within the object. Those variables are visible throughout the object, and its member functions.
Third, define your member functions as object.prototype.function = function(){};
Fourth, for my case, the object function should return this; This allows regular program flow to examine the variables of the object using dot notation.
This is the answer I was looking for. It takes my non-functional example code, and repackages it as an object...
function ServerObject(url){
// global to the object
this.server_url = url;
this.data = new Object();
this.since_record_id;
this.interval_id;
// do the onload functions
this.getRecent();
this.interval_id = setInterval(function(){
this.pollForNew();
}, 300000);
// do other stuff to setup the object
return this;
}
// define the getRecent function
ServerObject.prototype.getRecent = function(){
// do getRecent(); stuff
// reference object variables as this.variable;
}
// same for pollForNew();
ServerObject.prototype.pollForNew = function(){
// do pollForNew(); stuff here.
// reference object variables as this.variable;
}
Then in your program flow you do something like...
var server = new ServerObject("http://some.net/address");
server.variable = newValue; // access object variables
I mentioned the ADD in the first post. I'm smart enough to know how complex objects can be, and when I look for examples and explanations they expose certain layers of those complexities that cause my mind to just swim. It is difficult to drill down to the simple rules that get you started on the ground floor. What's the scope of 'this'? Sure I'll figure that out someday, but the simple truth is, you gotta reference 'this'.
Thanks
I wish I had more to offer.
Skip