Develop Reference

A native way of adding custom JavaScript functions into a method-calls chain

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()

Parameter of a function within a function

How must a function be 'chained', in order to call this function like this
F('Test').custom_substring(0,1);

You have to return an object that has a method member named custom_substring. One example:
var F = function(){
return {
custom_substring:function(){
console.log('custom substring');
return this;
}
}
}
F('Test')
.custom_substring(0,1)
.custom_substring(0,1)
.custom_substring(0,1);
To create objects you can use constructor functions and prototype, this is a complex subject and explained here.
I would not mess with the String.prototype because that breaks encapsulation.

The following sample provides a chainable custom_substring that does not modify the original object but instead returns a new one. This is similar to how jQuery and other libraries work (and how built-in string operations work) and it helps make for safer and more predictable code.
function F(str) {
return {
toString: function () { return str; },
// You didn't provide an example of what you want custom_substring
// to do, so I'll have it append a "!" to the beginning of the resulting value
// (since I can't think of anything else for it to do)
custom_substring: function (from, to) {
return F("!" + str.substring(from, to));
}
};
}
var s1 = F("Hello everyone");
var s2 = s1.custom_substring(0, 7);
var s3 = s2.custom_substring(0, 5)
.custom_substring(0, 4);
console.log(s1); // Hello everyone
console.log(s2); // !Hello e
console.log(s3); // !!!He

If you really want to create chainloading you need always return this from methods where it's possible.
For example we have some class with some methods:
function Foo() {
this.foo = 'bar';
return this;
}
Foo.prototype = Object.create({
sayFoo: function() {
console.log(this.foo);
return this;
},
getFoo: function() {
return this.foo; // Here you can't make chainload
},
saySmth: function() {
console.log('Something');
return this;
}
});
And we can use this:
var test = new Foo().sayFoo().saySmth().getFoo(); // prints this.foo -> 'Something' -> returns this.foo
console.log(test); // prints out this.foo

Crockford's Prototypical Inheritance - Usage

I've been building a small JS framework for use at my job, and I'd like to employ Douglas Crockford's prototypical inheritance patterns. I think I get the general idea of how the prototype object works, but what isn't clear is the way in which I would use this pattern beyond the simplest example.
I'll flesh it out to the point that I understand it.
(function () {
'use strict';
var Vehicles = {};
Vehicles.Vehicle = function () {
this.go = function () {
//go forwards
};
this.stop = function () {
//stop
};
};
Vehicles.Airplane = Object.create(Vehicles.Vehicle());
}());
So now my Vehicles.Airplane object can go() and stop(), but I want more. I want to add takeOff() and land() methods to this object. I could just use ugly dot notation afterwards:
Vehicles.Airplane.takeOff = function () {
//take off stuff
}
But that seems wrong, especially if I were to add many methods or properties. The question asked at here seems to be very similar to mine, but the answer doesn't quite ring true for me. The answer suggests that I should build an object literal before using Object.create, and that I should pass that object literal into the create method. In the example code given, however, it looks like their new object inherits nothing at all now.
What I'm hoping for is some syntax similar to:
Vehicles.Airplane = Object.create(Vehicles.Vehicle({
this.takeOff = function () {
//takeOff stuff
};
this.land = function () {
//land stuff
};
}));
I know this syntax will break terribly with Object.create right now, because of course I'm passing Vehicle.Vehicle a function rather than an object literal. That's beside the point. I'm wondering in what way I should build new properties into an object that inherits from another without having to list them out one at a time with dot notation after the fact.
EDIT:
Bergi, after some anguished thought on the topic, I think I really want to go with what you described as the "Classical Pattern". Here is my first stab at it (now with actual code snippets rather than mocked up hypotheticals - You even get to see my crappy method stubs):
CS.Button = function (o) {
o = o || {};
function init(self) {
self.domNode = dce('a');
self.text = o.text || '';
self.displayType = 'inline-block';
self.disabled = o.disabled || false;
self.domNode.appendChild(ctn(self.text));
if (o.handler) {
self.addListener('click', function () {
o.handler(self);
});
}
}
this.setText = function (newText) {
if (this.domNode.firstChild) {
this.domNode.removeChild(this.domNode.firstChild);
}
this.domNode.appendChild(ctn(newText));
};
init(this);
};
CS.Button.prototype = Object.create(CS.Displayable.prototype, {
constructor: {value: CS.Button, configurable: true}
});
CS.Displayable = function (o) { // o = CS Object
o = o || {};
var f = Object.create(new CS.Element(o));
function init(self) {
if (!self.domAnchor) {
self.domAnchor = self.domNode;
}
if (self.renderTo) {
self.renderTo.appendChild(self.domAnchor);
}
}
//Public Methods
this.addClass = function (newClass) {
if (typeof newClass === 'string') {
this.domNode.className += ' ' + newClass;
}
};
this.addListener = function (event, func, capture) {
if (this.domNode.addEventListener) {
this.domNode.addEventListener(event, func, capture);
} else if (this.domNode.attachEvent) {
this.domNode.attachEvent('on' + event, func);
}
};
this.blur = function () {
this.domNode.blur();
};
this.disable = function () {
this.disabled = true;
};
this.enable = function () {
this.disabled = false;
};
this.focus = function () {
this.domNode.focus();
};
this.getHeight = function () {
return this.domNode.offsetHeight;
};
this.getWidth = function () {
return this.domNode.offsetWidth;
};
this.hide = function () {
this.domNode.style.display = 'none';
};
this.isDisabled = function () {
return this.disabled;
};
this.removeClass = function (classToRemove) {
var classArray = this.domNode.className.split(' ');
classArray.splice(classArray.indexOf(classToRemove), 1);
this.domNode.className = classArray.join(' ');
};
this.removeListener = function () {
//Remove DOM element listener
};
this.show = function () {
this.domNode.style.display = this.displayType;
};
init(this);
};
CS.Displayable.prototype = Object.create(CS.Element.prototype, {
constructor: {value: CS.Displayable, configurable: true}
});
I should be quite clear and say that it's not quite working yet, but mostly I'd like your opinion on whether I'm even on the right track. You mentioned "instance-specific properties and methods" in a comment in your example. Does that mean that my this.setText method and others are wrongly placed, and won't be available to descendant items on the prototype chain?
Also, when used, it seems that the order of declaration now matters (I can't access CS.Displayable.prototype, because (I think) CS.Button is listed first, and CS.Displayable is undefined at the time that I'm trying to reference it). Is that something I'll just have to man up and deal with (put things in order of ancestry in the code rather than my OCD alphabetical order) or is there something I'm overlooking there as well?

Vehicles.Airplane = Object.create(Vehicles.Vehicle());
That line is wrong. You seem to want to use new Vehicles.Vehicle - never call a constructor without new!
Still, I'm not sure which pattern you want to use. Two are coming to my mind:
Classical Pattern
You are using constructor functions just as in standard JS. Inheritance is done by inheriting the prototype objects from each other, and applying the parent constructor on child instances. Your code should then look like this:
Vehicles.Vehicle = function () {
// instance-specific properties and methods,
// initialising
}
Vehicles.Vehicle.prototype.go = function () {
//go forwards
};
Vehicles.Vehicle.prototype.stop = function () {
//stop
};
Vehicles.Airplane = function() {
// Vehicles.Vehicle.apply(this, arguments);
// not needed here as "Vehicle" is empty
// maybe airplane-spefic instance initialisation
}
Vehicles.Airplane.prototype = Object.create(Vehicles.Vehicle.prototype, {
constructor: {value:Vehicles.Airplane, configurable:true}
}); // inheriting from Vehicle prototype, and overwriting constructor property
Vehicles.Airplane.prototype.takeOff = function () {
//take off stuff
};
// usage:
var airplane = new Vehicles.Airplace(params);
Pure Prototypical Pattern
You are using plain objects instead of constructor functions - no initialisation. To create instances, and to set up inheritance, only Object.create is used. It is like having only the prototype objects, and empty constructors. instancof does not work here. The code would look like this:
Vehicles.Vehicle = {
go: function () {
//go forwards
},
stop: function () {
//stop
}
}; // just an object literal
Vehicles.Airplane = Object.create(Vehicles.Vehicle); // a new object inheriting the go & stop methods
Vehicles.Airplane.takeOff = function () {
//take off stuff
};
// usage:
var airplane = Object.create(Vehicles.Airplane);
airplane.prop = params; // maybe also an "init" function, but that seems weird to me

You got Object.create wrong. The first argument should be an object (maybe that's why people suggested you pass a literal).
In your first example, you're actually passing undefined:
Vehicles.Airplane = Object.create(Vehicles.Vehicle()); // the function call will
// return undefined
The following would work, but it's not very Crockford-ish:
Vehicles.Airplane = Object.create(new Vehicles.Vehicle());
The way I believe Crockford would do it (or, at least, wouldn't complain of):
var Vehicles = {};
Vehicles.Vehicle = {
go : function() {
// go stuff
},
stop : function() {
// go stuff
}
};
Vehicles.Airplane = Object.create(Vehicles.Vehicle, {
takeOff : {
value : function() {
// take-off stuff
}
},
land : {
value: function() {
// land stuff
}
}
});
Note that Vehicles.Vehicle is just a literal, which will be used as the prototype for other objects. When we call Object.create, we pass Vehicles.Vehicle as the prototype, and takeOff and land will be own properties of Vehicles.Airplane. You may then call Object.create again, passing Vehicles.Airplane as the prototype, if you want to create e.g. a Boeing.
The own properties passed as the second parameter are packed in an object that contains a representation of their property descriptors. The outer keys are the names of your properties/methods, and each one points to another object containing the actual implementation as the value. You may also include other keys like enumerable; if you don't they'll take the default values. You can read more about descriptors on the MDN page about Object.defineProperty.

How do I add a method to a function?

Specifically, how can I write prototypes that allow chaining, such as the following:
$('myDiv').html('Hello World').fadeIn('slow');

The technique you're describing is called fluent interface, and it involves returning the same kind of object from all chainable functions. That object's prototype contains the function definitions.
The linked article includes example code in various languages, including javascript.

Just return the appropriate stuff from the functions. The basic rule of thumb is take any method that would normaly return nothing and make it return this instead.
function Constructor(){};
Constructor.prototype = {
foo: function(){
console.log('foo');
return this;
},
bar: function(x){
console.log('bar', x);
return this;
}
}
var obj = new Constructor();
obj.foo().bar(17).bar(42).foo();

In that particular situation, each method returns this. So:
// ... this has to be the most impractical class I've ever written, but it is a
// great illustration of the point.
var returner = new function() {
this.returnThis = function(){
console.log("returning");
return this
}
}
var ret2 = returner.returnThis().returnThis().
returnThis().returnThis() // logs "returning" four times.
console.log( ret2 == returner ) // true

Chaining example:
var avatar = function() {
this.turnLeft = function {
// some logic here
return this;
}
this.turnRight = function {
// some logic here
return this;
}
this.pickUpItem = function {
// some logic here
return this;
}
};
var frodo = new avatar();
frodo.turnLeft().turnRight().pickUpItem();

How do I compute a variable in JavaScript if and only if it is used?

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