Develop Reference

Do javascript functions need to be declared in the reverse order?

Elaboration: If I would have, for example the following code:
//Javascript example
var alice = function() {
var value = bob() + 1;
console.log value
}
var bob = function() {
var value = 1;
return value;
}
//Running function A
alice()
Would I have to declare function B first, because I am calling it in function A without reaching function B yet.

No.
If you have a function declaration, then it will be hoisted and order doesn't matter (although putting functions in an order so that a function call doesn't appear before the function being called is good practice).
If you have function expressions (as you do in your example), then you need to have the functions created before they are called, noting that in this example none of them are called before the line alice() so only that line needs to be after the functions and the order of the functions themselves doesn't matter. (But the best practise principles described above hold).

No, because the Javascript interpreter will recognize the functions declared after and link them appropriately to the line in question.

The only limitation is the definition of every function before utilization

how to use javascript functions? (defining functions in label)

There are different ways of defining the javascript functions. I often use the simplest way to define the function
function myfunc(){
}
and the next way to define the function in the variable like this (a little bit confusing the way of using)
var myvar = myfunc(){
/*some code*/
}
and the difficult way for me and mostly found in codes developed by advanced programmers like the following
var SqueezeBox={presets:{onOpen:function(){},onClose:function(){}}
Please, can anyone clear my concept on this how can I use?

function myfunc(){}
Function declaration: the function is declared using the standard syntax
function functionName(params[]) {
//functionbody
}
Using this syntax declares the function at the begin of the scope execution, so they'll be available everywhere in their scope(and in their descendeant scopes).
var s = myfunc(); //s == 0
function myfunc() {return 0;}
var myfunc = function() {};
This uses the pattern known as function expression, it just assigns a reference of an anonymous function to a variable named myfunc. Using this syntax won't allow you to use the function until the variable is parsed. Even if variables are hoisted at the top of their scope, they're initialized when the interpreter parses them, so the above example won't work:
var s = myfunc(); //ReferenceError: myfunc is not defined
var myfunc = function() {return 0;};
But the example below will:
var myfunc = function() {return 0;};
var s = myfunc(); //s == 0
The third example is just assigning an anonymous function to an object property(also known as object method) in the way we've just done with function expression, so if I use the pattern above the code will become:
var onOpen = function() {},
onClose = function() {},
SqueezeBox = {//curly braces denotes an object literal
presets: {//again, this is a nested object literal
onOpen: onOpen,
onClose: onClose
}
};
This acts exactly the same as your example, with the only difference that here I used a variable to get a reference to the anonymous function before passing it to the object. If you need to know more about objects, I recommend you reading the MDN docs. Anyway, if you're really intrested in how JS works, I'd suggest Javascript Garden, which is a very good article about JS.

The first code snippet is a function declaration:
function myfunc() { }
You are declaring a named function called myfunc. You can verify this by myfunc.name === "myfunc"
Your second code snippet contains syntax error. I believe you meant:
var myvar = function() { };
This is an anonymous function expression assigned to a variable. You can verify this by typeof myvar === "function" and myvar.name === "".
The third snippet is a javascript object. Basically you can think of it as a Map or Dictionary<string, object>. So SqueezeBox contains 1 key presets, which in turn is a dictionary that contains 2 keys, onOpen and onClose, which both of them are anonymous functions.

In
var SqueezeBox={presets:{onOpen:function(){},onClose:function(){}}}
He's creating an object SqueezeBox containing another object presets with two empty anonymous functions, he's defining the function inline with an empty body inside the {}.
A better way to see it is formatted this way:
var SqueezeBox={
presets:{
onOpen:function(){/* empty function body */},
onClose:function(){/*empty function body */}
}
}

There is a lot of useful information on this subject here
Functions can have a name, which if specified cannot be changed. Functions can also be assigned to variables like any other object in javascript.
The first example is of a function declaration:
function myfunc(){
}
Using the function declaration you will be able to call the function from anywhere within the closure in which the function is declared, even if it is declared after it is used.
The other two examples are function expressions:
var myvar = function(){
/*some code*/
}
var SqueezeBox= {
presets: {
onOpen:function(){/* empty function body */},
onClose:function(){/*empty function body */}
}
}
Using function expressions you are assigning functions to a variable. When doing this you must declare them before you use them. Most of the time you see this the functions will be anonymous but it is possible to name a function in an expression:
var myvar = function myFunc(){
myFunc(); // Because it has a name you can now call it recursively
}
When doing this, the myFunc function is only available within the body of the function because it is still a function expression rather than a declaration.
The third example declares a javascript object literal, SqueezeBox and within that object there is another called presets. Within this object there are two more objects/labels called onOpen and onClose. This means you can do the following to use these functions:
SqueezeBox.presets.onOpen();
SqueezeBox.presets.onClose();
You can think of onOpen and onClose as variables that are part of the object. So it's very similar to doing the following (but the variable is only in the scope of the presets object which is only available within the SqueezeBox object).
var onOpen = function() {};

This has already been answered here: What is the difference between a function expression vs declaration in Javascript?.
For the last example, as Atropo said, it's affecting an anonymous function to an object. It's similar to the var example.

Difference between funct1: function versus funct1 function () [duplicate]

This question already has answers here:
var functionName = function() {} vs function functionName() {}
(41 answers)
Closed 9 years ago.
I often see code like the following in JavaScript:
func1: function() {
return array1.pop();
}
What is the difference between the above and something like this:
function func1 (){
return array1.pop();
}
Are the above two the same thing with different way of writing? The first one looks like a switch statement to me. Sorry if this question is too simple but JavaScript books seldom uses the first syntax if this is just the matter of syntax issue; the main reason for me to ask this question in StackOverflow.

The first one is creating a property on an object literal. The property name is func1 and the property value is an anonymous function. For example:
var someObject = {
someProp: function () {
alert('foo');
}
};
someObject.someProp(); // alerts "foo"
For the second one you probably meant function func1 ..., which is a plain old function declaration. For example:
function someFunction() {
alert('foo');
}
someFunction(); // alerts "foo"
Most people use object literals as a way of grouping logical functionality together, similar to namespaces in other languages. By defining functions as properties of other variables, you keep the number of variables in the global namespace down and the code more organized.

The second form is that of a “normal” function declaration: the function is available within the scope in which you’ve declared it. The first form is used inside an object literal:
var myObject = {
func: function() {
return array1.pop();
},
name: 'John Smith'
};
The function can be called as myObject.func() whenever myObject is accessible. Aside from this difference in scoping, the two definitions of the function are equivalent.

There is also a very important difference referred to as "function hoisting" (vague in terms of ECMA, but is a common term to describe the behavior).. This is directly related to the "second way" in original question namely -
function func1 (){
return array1.pop();
}
There are two ways we may use functions (again wrt to second way):
As a function expression -
var a = function() {
}
As a function declaration
function a() {
}
As you know, all variables, no matter where in the function body they are declared, get
hoisted to the top of the function behind the scenes. The same applies for functions
because they are just objects assigned to variables. The only “gotcha” is that when using
a function declaration, the definition of the function also gets hoisted, not only its
declaration.

Is this an anonymous function?

In the first snippet below, based on my understanding I am creating a function and assigning it to a variable. But does that mean the function will take that name of the variable ?
var aFunc = function(){};
I know this is named function.
function bFunc(){};

So, first of all we have to clarify the main difference between the two functions you wrote.
This one:
var aFunc = function(){};
is a function expression. Where this one:
function bFunc(){};
is a function declaration.
In a function expression you're using the function operator to defines a function inside an expression.
When you declare a function you're using the function statement.
At the beginning it can be confusing because they're really similar, however function declaration and function expression behaves differently. First of all, you can't declare a function that is anonymous: if you're using a function statement, the name is mandatory.
So only functions defined with the function operator can be anonymous:
var aFunc = function(){};
That's an anonymous function. In some browsers you can actually print the function's name and see by yourself:
console.log(aFunc.name);
(Notice that this is not standard yet, but there is a proposal)
But it doesn't means that functions declared with the function operator have to be anonymous. For instance:
var aFunc = function myFunction() {};
It's a named function. However, that's still different from having a function declaration like that:
function myFunction() {};
var aFunc = myFunction;
Why? Because in case of function expression, you don't declare a myFunction function in the scope:
var aFunc = function myFunction() {};
console.log(typeof myFunction) // undefined, unless some bugs
So what's the point to give a name to a function expression? The answer is: to have access from that function from the function's body itself, without pollute the scope. Imaging for instance you want to add an event listener to a DOM node, but execute the listener only once:
document.body.addEventListener("click", function onclick() {
// do something
document.body.removeEventListener("click", onclick, false);
}, false);
So you don't pollute the scope with a lot of functions that you use only for purpose like that ones, and you can still have access to the function from the function's body. That's especially useful in ES5 where arguments.callee is deprecated, and for recursion.
Another difference between function expression is that you can invoke them immediately, but you can't do that for function declaration. So, for instance:
function() {
console.log('foo');
}();
Will throw an exception, because the engine can't understand if it's a function declaration or a function expression. But if you force the engine to look at it as an expression:
!function() {
console.log('foo');
}();
// or
(function(){
console.log('foo');
}());
// etc, there are a lot of ways
Here we are: JS understand is an expression, therefore threats the function as an operator and not as a statement. And you obtain the IIFE (Immediately-Invoked Function Expression), that are useful in a lot of scenarios, specially where you want to isolate code.
So, back to you question, why the name of this function:
var aFunc = function(){};
is not aFunc?
Because, it's an expression. So the value knows nothing about the assignment on the left. It's like having:
var aFunc = -3;
Where the - is the Unary Negation operation and the 3 is the value: they knows nothing about aFunc, right? It's exactly the same with function expression, where function is the operator, and (){} is the value.

No.
In the first example you are creating an anonymous function and then assigning it to "aFunc"
In the second example you declare a function and call it bFunc.
The most notable difference between the two is that you can't call "aFunc" until after the line where you assign it.

No, the function will not "take the name of the variable". The variable will hold a reference to an anonymous function. The function itself is still anonymous.
Note that this makes little difference in the end though, this function reference can be treated exactly the same as any regular named function once it's assigned. In fact, it makes so little difference, a named function can be treated like a variable holding a function reference too:
function foo() { }
foo();
foo = 'bar';
alert(foo); // bar

The term "anonymous function" is jargon, so likely what it means will change over time. There is no specification that states what it is, so it can be whatever you want it to be. And whatever you decide will likely be disputed by someone else. Jargon is like that (look up the word "trunking", a common jargon term in telephony).
Strictly, there are function declarations where the name is mandatory, e.g.
function foo() {
...
}
and function expressions where the name is optional. If the name is missing, e.g.:
var x = function () {
...
};
then that, to me, is an anonymous function. If it has a name, e.g.
var x = function foo() {
...
};
then it's a named function expression (and not an anonymous function). From my perspective, any function expression without an optional name is an anonymous function. There are many uses for function expressions, e.g.
// assignment to a variable
var x = function() {...}
// pass as a parameter
foo(function(){...})
// immediately executed and pass the result
foo( (function(){...}()) )
and so on. So in the OP, the right hand side of the assignment is a function expression with no name so to me, that's an anonymous function. The fact that it's then assigned to an identifier doesn't suddenly make it a named function expression.
Others may differ of course.
Incidentally, the results of:
function foo(){}
and
var foo = function(){};
are practically indistinguishable, the main difference is when the functions are created.

No it is not. The right hand side of your first statement is a Function Expression. It is anonymous as long as you don't assign it to a variable.
After you have assigned it, you can use it as a declared function.
See more details about function declarations in this question

Two functions with the same name in JavaScript - how can this work?

As far as I know, function foo() { aaa(); } is just var foo = function(){ aaa() } in JavaScript. So adding function foo() { bbb(); } should either overwrite the foo variable, or ignore the second definition - that's not the point. The point is that there should be one variable foo.
So, in this example the me variable should not be correctly resolved from inside the methods and it is not in Explorer 8 :-). I came to this example by trying to wrap them into another closure where (var) me would be, but I was surprised that it's not necessary:
var foo = {
bar1 : function me() {
var index = 1;
alert(me);
},
bar2 : function me() {
var index = 2;
alert(me);
}
};
foo.bar1(); // Shows the first one
foo.bar2(); // Shows the second one
Demo: http://jsfiddle.net/W5dqy/5/

AFAIK function foo() { aaa(); } is just var foo = function(){ aaa() } in JavaScript.
Not quite; they're similar, but also quite different. JavaScript has two different but related things: Function declarations (your first example there), and function expressions (your second, which you then assign to a variable). They happen at different times in the parsing cycle and have different effects.
This is a function declaration:
function foo() {
// ...
}
Function declarations are processed upon entry into the enclosing scope, before any step-by-step code is executed.
This is a function expression (specifically, an anonymous one):
var foo = function() {
// ...
};
Function expressions are processed as part of the step-by-step code, at the point where they appear (just like any other expression).
Your quoted code is using a named function expression, which look like this:
var x = function foo() {
// ...
};
(In your case it's within an object literal, so it's on the right-hand side of an : instead of an =, but it's still a named function expression.)
That's perfectly valid, ignoring implementation bugs (more in a moment). It creates a function with the name foo, doesn't put foo in the enclosing scope, and then assigns that function to the x variable (all of this happening when the expression is encountered in the step-by-step code). When I say it doesn't put foo in the enclosing scope, I mean exactly that:
var x = function foo() {
alert(typeof foo); // alerts "function" (in compliant implementations)
};
alert(typeof foo); // alerts "undefined" (in compliant implementations)
Note how that's different from the way function declarations work (where the function's name is added to the enclosing scope).
Named function expressions work on compliant implementations. Historically, there were bugs in implementations (early Safari, IE8 and earlier). Modern implementations get them right, including IE9 and up. (More here: Double take and here: Named function expressions demystified.)
So, in this example the me variable shoudl not be corectly resolved from inside the methods
Actually, it should be. A function's true name (the symbol between function and the opening parenthesis) is always in-scope within the function (whether the function is from a declaration or a named function expression).
NOTE: The below was written in 2011. With the advances in JavaScript since, I no longer feel the need to do things like the below unless I know I'm going to be dealing with IE8 (which is very rare these days).
Because of implementation bugs, I used to avoid named function expressions. You can do that in your example by just removing the me names, but I prefer named functions, and so for what it's worth, here's how I used to write your object:
var foo = (function(){
var publicSymbols = {};
publicSymbols.bar1 = bar1_me;
function bar1_me() {
var index = 1;
alert(bar1_me);
}
publicSymbols.bar2 = bar2_me;
function bar2_me() {
var index = 2;
alert(bar2_me);
}
return publicSymbols;
})();
(Except I'd probably use a shorter name than publicSymbols.)
Here's how that gets processed:
An anonymous enclosing function is created when the var foo = ... line is encountered in the step-by-step code, and then it is called (because I have the () at the very end).
Upon entry into the execution context created by that anonymous function, the bar1_me and bar2_me function declarations are processed and those symbols are added to the scope inside that anonymous function (technically, to the variable object for the execution context).
The publicSymbols symbol is added to the scope inside the anonymous function. (More: Poor misunderstood var)
Step-by-step code begins by assigning {} to publicSymbols.
Step-by-step code continues with publicSymbols.bar1 = bar1_me; and publicSymbols.bar2 = bar2_me;, and finally return publicSymbols;
The anonymous function's result is assigned to foo.
These days, though, unless I'm writing code I know needs to support IE8 (sadly, as I write this in November 2015 it still has significant global market share, but happily that share is plummetting), I don't worry about it. All modern JavaScript engines understand them just fine.
You can also write that like this:
var foo = (function(){
return {
bar1: bar1_me,
bar2: bar2_me
};
function bar1_me() {
var index = 1;
alert(bar1_me);
}
function bar2_me() {
var index = 2;
alert(bar2_me);
}
})();
...since those are function declarations, and thus are hoisted. I don't usually do it like that, as I find it easier to do maintenance on large structures if I do the declaration and the assignment to the property next to each other (or, if not writing for IE8, on the same line).

Both me lookups, are only visible/available inside the function expression.
Infact those two are named function expressions, and the ECMAscript specification tells us, that the name of an expression is not exposed to the such called Variable object.
Well I tried to put that only in a few words, but while trying to find the right words, this ends up in pretty deep chain of ECMAscript behavior. So, function expression are not stored in a Variable / Activation Object. (Would lead to the question, who those guys are...).
Short: Every time a function is called, a new Context is created. There is some "blackmagic" kind of guy that is called, Activation object which stores some stuff. For instance, the
arguments of the function
the [[Scope]]
any variables created by var
For instance:
function foo(test, bar) {
var hello = "world";
function visible() {
}
(function ghost() {
}());
}
The Activation Object for foo would look like:
arguments: test, bar
variables: hello (string), visible (function)
[[Scope]]: (possible parent function-context), Global Object
ghost is not stored in the AO! it would just be accesssible under that name within the function itself. While visible() is a function declaration (or function statement) it is stored in the AO. This is because, a function declaration is evaluated when parsing and function expression is evaluated at runtime.

What happens here is that function() has many different meanings and uses.
When I say
bar1 : function me() {
}
then that's 100% equivalent to
bar1 : function() {
}
i.e. the name doesn't matter when you use function to assign the variable bar1. Inside, me is assigned but as soon as the function definition is left (when you assign bar2), me is created again as a local variable for the function definition that is stored in bar2.