Develop Reference

Confused about when to use `bind` in an Event Handler

The following successfully prints 'foo'.
var obj = {
name: 'foo',
printName: function printName() {
console.log(this.name);
}
};
var printButton= document.getElementById('printIt');
printButton.addEventListener('click', function(){
obj.printName();
});
The following doesn't, however:
printButton.addEventListener('click', obj.printName() );
I know the solution... simply use bind so that we're referencing the obj object. i.e:
printButton.addEventListener('click', obj.printName.bind(obj) );
Why then don't we need to use bind in the first example. I don't know why wrapping obj.printName() function call in the anonymous function results in the console.log correctly referencing and printing this properly, but when called directly after click, you needs to use bind

Alright, I commented with some good information on this question so I might as well answer!
Functions are first class
Okay, let's starts with some fundamentals of javascript that is very dissimilar to some other programming languages: in javascript functions are first class citizens--which is just a fancy way of saying that you can save functions into variables and you can pass functions into other functions.
const myFunction = function () { return 'whoa a function'; }
array.map(function () { return x + 1; });
And because of this wonderful feature, there is a big difference between the expressions:
Expression 1
obj.printName
and
Expression 2
obj.printName();
In expression 1: the function isn't being invoked so the value of the expression is of type function
In expression 2: the function is being invoked so the value of the expression is what the function returns. In your case, that's undefined
addEventListener
The method addEventListener takes in two arguments:
a string of the type of event
a function that will be run when the event fires.
Alight, so what does that mean?
When you call
// doesn't work
printButton.addEventListener('click', obj.printName() );
you're not passing a value of type function to the addEventListener method, you're actually passing undefined.
// works
printButton.addEventListener('click', obj.printName.bind(obj) );
then works (for one reason) because the second argument is actually of type function.
What does bind do? Why does it return a function?
Now we need to discuss what bind actually does. It related to the pointer* this.
*by pointer, I mean a reference identifier to some object
bind is a method that exists on every function object that simply binds the this pointer of a desired object to the function
This is best shown by an example:
Say you have a class Fruit that has a method printName. Now that we know that you can save a method into a variable, let's try that. In the example below we're assigning two things:
boundMethod which used bind
unboundMethod that didn't use bind
class Fruit {
constructor() {
this.name = 'apple';
}
printName() {
console.log(this.name);
}
}
const myFruit = new Fruit();
// take the method `printName`
const boundMethod = myFruit.printName.bind(myFruit);
const unboundMethod = myFruit.printName;
boundMethod(); // works
unboundMethod(); // doesn't work
So what happens when you don't call bind? Why doesn't that work?
If you don't call bind in this case, the value of the function that gets stored into the identifier unboundMethod can be thought to be:
// doens't work
const unboundMethod = function() {
console.log(this.name);
}
where the contents of the function is the same contents of the method printName from the Fruit class. Do you see why this is an issue?
Because the this pointer is still there but the object it was intended to refer to is no longer in scope. When you try to invoke the unboundMethod, you'll get an error because it couldn't find name in this.
So what happens when you do use bind?
Loosely bind can be thought of as replacing the this value of function with the object you're passing into bind.
So if I assign: myFruit.printName.bind(myFruit) to boundMethod then you can think of the assignment like this:
// works
const boundMethod = function() {
console.log(myFruit.name);
}
where this is replaced with myFruit
The bottom-line/TL;DR
when to use bind in an Event Handler
You need to use Function.prototype.bind when you want to replace the thises inside the function with another object/pointer. If your function doesn't ever use this, then you don't need to use bind.
Why then don't we need to use bind in the first example?
If you don't need to "take the method" (i.e. taking the value of type of function), then you don't need to use bind either Another way to word that is: if you invoke the method directly from the object, you don't need bind that same object.
In the wrapper function, you're directly invoking the method of the object (as in expression 2). Because you're invoking the method without "taking the method" (we "took" the methods into variables in the Fruit example), you don't need to use bind.
printButton.addEventListener('click', function(){
// directly invoke the function
// no method "taking" here
obj.printName();
});
Hope this helps :D

Note: You need to call printButton.addEventListener('click', obj.printName() ); without parenthesis in obj.printName() since you want to pass the function.
The answer lies in the way this is bound in Javascript. In JS, the way a function is called decides how this is bound. So when you provide the callback function like below:
printButton.addEventListener('click', function(){
obj.printName();
});
Notice, printName is being called via dot notation. This is called implicit binding rule when this is bound to an object before dot, in this case obj. Clearly in this case, you get the expected output.
However, when you call it like this:
printButton.addEventListener('click', obj.printName );
Notice that, all you are passing is the address of the function that is inside obj. So in this case info about obj is lost. In other words, the code that calls back the function doesn't have the info about obj that could have been used to set this. All it has is the address of the function to call.
Hope this helps!
EDIT:
Look at this crude implementation I call bind2 that mimics native bind. This is just to illustrate how native bind function returns a new function.
Function.prototype.bind2 = function (context) {
var callBackFunction = this;//Store the function to call later
return function () { //return a new function
callBackFunction.call(context);//Later when called, apply
//context, this is `obj` passed
//in bind2()
}
};
function hello() {
alert(this.name);
}
obj = {
name:'ABC'
};
var f = hello.bind2(obj);
f();
Notice: How function f() is hard bound here. f() has hard bound this with obj. You cannot change this to other than obj now. This is another thing with bind that probably will help you knowing.

Nested .bind not working as expected

Unfortunately .bind has been giving me grief when creating more complex closures.
I am quite interested in why .bind seems to work differently once you nest functions.
For example :
function t(){
t = t.bind({}); //correctly assigns *this* to t
function nested_t(){
nested_t = nested_t.bind({}); // fails to assign *this* to nested_t
return nested_t;
}
return nested_t();
}
//CASE ONE
alert(t());
// alerts the whole function t instead of nested_t
//CASE TWO
aleft(t.call(t));
// alerts the global object (window)
In both cases I was expecting a behavior like this:
function t(){
var nested_t = function nested_t(){
return this;
};
return nested_t.call(nested_t);
}
alert(t.call(t));
If someone could explain the behavior of .bind in the first (and/or) second case it would be much appreciated!

So, i'm not entirely reproducing your issue here (both cases return the global object), but i'll try and explain the code as i see it.
function t(){
t = t.bind({}); //correctly assigns *this* to t
function nested_t(){
nested_t = nested_t.bind({}); // fails to assign *this* to nested_t
return this;
}
return nested_t();
}
//CASE ONE
alert(t());
Let's take it step by step.
First, the function t() is defined. Then, upon call, it gets overwritten with a clean context. However, i don't see any usage of this context.
Now, a nested function (nested_t) is defined. Upon call, it is overwritten with a clean context. It then returns the context it had when it was called.
Back to t(). You then return the result of nested_t(), not nested_t itself. In the original function call, nested_t is still being called with global context.
Therefore, when you run t(), it returns the global object.

How your code works
It's very unclear, what your code is trying to do. You can find the documentation for .bind() here. It looks like you might be somehow misunderstanding what this is and how to use it. Anyway, what happens when you run your code is this:
A t function is created in global scope.
[case one] The t function is called.
Global scope t is replaced with a new value (original t bound to a specific context - anonymous empty object), which doesn't affect the current call in any way. Also, while the global t is overwritten, the local t is behaving as read-only. You can check it out by trying the following code: (function foo () { return (function bar () { bar = window.bar = 'baz'; return bar; })(); })() and comparing return value with window.bar.
The same thing happens with nested_t in the nested context (instead of global context).
Result of nested_t call is returned. nested_t returns the context it was called with, which was window, as no context was specified. Specifically, it was not called with an empty object context, because the .bind() inside didn't affect the call itself.
[case two] The exact same thing happens once again. Now you're just calling t with itself as context. Since t doesn't use its context (this) anywhere in its code, nothing really changes.
What your misconceptions might be
Basically, you're mixing up two things - function instance and function call context. A function is a "first-class citizen" in JavaScript - it's an object and you can assign values to its properties.
function foo () {
foo.property = 'value';
}
foo(); // foo.property is assigned a value
This has nothing to do with function call context. When you call a function a context is assigned to that call, which can be accessed using this (inside function body)
function foo () {
this.property = 'value';
}
var object = {};
foo.call(object); // object.property is assigned a value
When you use .bind(), you just create a new function with the same code, that is locked to a specific context.
function foo () {
this.property = 'value';
}
var fixedContext = {},
object = {};
bar = foo.bind(fixedContext);
foo.call(object); // fixedContext.property is set instead of object.property
But in this case, there are also function instances foo and bar, which can also be assigned properties, and which have nothing to do with contexts of calls of those functions.

Let's look at how bind works. First, one level of nesting:
var foo = function() { return this.x; };
alert(foo()); // undefined
alert(foo.bind({x: 42})()); // 42
Now we can add the next level of nesting:
var bar = function() { return foo.bind(this)(); };
alert(bar()); // undefined
alert(bar.bind({x: 42})());
We pass our this context to foo with - guess what? - bind. There is nothing different about the way bind works between scopes. The only difference is that we've already bound this within bar, and so the body of bar is free to re-bind this within foo.
As a couple of commenters have noted, functions that overwrite themselves are a huge code smell. There is no reason to do this; you can bind context to your functions when you call them.
I highly, highly recommend reading the documentation on bind, and trying to understand it to the point where you can write a basic version of Function.prototype.bind from scratch.

How do the following Javascript functions affect the value of 'this'?

I have an object which has two functions within it, and as I guessed each one has a different value for this:
custom_controls : {
play_pause : function () {
console.log(this); // object
videoPlayer.getIsPlaying(function (video_is_playing) {
if (video_is_playing) {
console.log(this); // window
videoPlayer.pause(true);
} else {
videoPlayer.play();
}
});
}
},
Then the function is invoked like this:
custom_controls.play_pause()
I've heard that the way you invoke a function denotes the value of this.
So my question is: What is happening here? What kind of function invocations am I using? And how does each one affect this?

When calling obj.func(), this inside the function will be equal to obj. If there is no obj, the global object (window) is used instead. Or if you are running in Strict Mode, undefined is used.
The first log is your object because you call the function like this:
custom_controls.play_pause() // custom_controls will be 'this'
The second log is window because the function passed as parameter to getIsPlaying is not called with any this:
videoPlayer.getIsPlaying = function(callback) {
callback(); // this inside callback will be window
}
You can control what the value of this will be when you invoke a function by using call or apply. You can create a new function which will always have the this value set to whatever you want by using the bind function:
videoPlayer.getIsPlaying(function (video_is_playing) {
if (video_is_playing) {
console.log(this); // my obj
videoPlayer.pause(true);
} else {
videoPlayer.play();
}
}.bind(this)); // magic!
Reference: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/Function/bind

Each function is actually executed within a context. That context is denoted as the current this for which you call the function.
Given your code:
If you call custom_controls.play_pause() you are saying "Take the field of the object custom_controls named play_pause and execute it within the context of the object custom_controls".
Later on calling videoPlayer.getIsPlaying() means pretty much the same. Except you're giving it a callback function. How that callback function is executed later on depends on how videoPlayer.getIsPlaying is implemented.
If I have to guess I'd say that getIsPlaying has a callback.call(window, video_is_playing) somewhere in it.
call is a method of all function objects in javascript.
There are a few ways to work around this "issue" if you want to reference a this in some callback.
var self = this;
call_me_maybe(function() {
console.log(this); //the this that call_me_maybe chose to call your function with
console.log(self); //the this from the upper scope
});
or if you don't care about the object in which context call_me_maybe will call your function:
call_me_maybe((function(){
console.log(this); //the this from the upper scope
}).bind(this));
What bind does is it returns a wrap[per of the function which will always be called in the context of the object to which it is bound.
bind can also bind arguments as well as the this object for the function, creating a sort of curry.

Your first this is referring to play_pause.
Your second this could either be referring to the Window or your videoPlayer object. In JavaScript, closures and regular functions are 'generally' attached to window, and calling this returns window. In certain cases, e.g. if you attach a function to the click handler of an HTML element, this refers to the element...
element.onclick = function(){
this // -> element
}
But generally if you just create a function(), or have an anonymous one like yours this refers to window.
function hello(){
this // -> window
}

The this that you've discovered is the object is what you would expect because the function is operating on that object.
I'm not familiar with your videoPlayer, but as the value of this is the "window", I would imagine that either A the video player is a function of the browser itself, or B its scope was not properly closed.

this refers to the "proprietary" of the function, or the object from the function is a method of.
When you define a basic function, the "proprietary" is the page (or the window) itself.
You can check the callback documentation for workarounds

When you call videoPlayer.getIsPlaying it accepts a callback fn. Callback is invoked directly like cb() and hence the context is global (window).
To achieve the callback happening in context of your object. You can use
var fn = cb.bind(customControl);
videoPlayer.getIsPlaying(fn);
As a rule of thumb when a function is called like object.function this is set to object. If function is called directly, this is set to window. Function.bind return a function after binding object (this value) optionally along with parameters.
Read: MDN https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/Function/bind

why is this private method in a constructor?

I'm a bit puzzled by this coding pattern I've run into even though I've been studying up on 'this.' The following (simplified) code shows the pattern:
var MyConstructor = function MyConstructor() {
this._handlers = {
action: this.handleAction.bind(this)
};
};
MyConstructor.prototype.start = function(someObj) {
this.someObj.on(’some event’, this._handlers.action); //<--here
}
MyConstructor.prototype.handleAction = function() {
//do stuff
}
module.exports = MyConstructor;
My question is, why is the private method in the constructor required? Is this pattern avoid some common problem? Could the line commented //<--here simply be:
this.someObj.on(’some event’, this.handleAction);

No, they are different. The difference is in context, which means the value of this within the function.
this.handleAction passes the function to on without any context. There is no value of this specified. The value will be determined when the function is executed. It is very likely that the value will not be the a MyConstructor object, so this.start, for instance, will not refer to the right object, or indeed perhaps any object at all.
The solution is to bind context. This sets the context forever, so this will always refer to the right value. You see this line of code:
action: this.handleAction.bind(this)
This means that, when the code later refers to this._handlers.action, it will be sending the function to on with the appropriate context, so this will always point to the correct value.

The difference between the following lines
this.someObj.on(’some event’, this.handleAction.bind(this));
this.someObj.on(’some event’, this.handleAction);
... is that the first handleAction will run with this being the instance of MyConstructor, while the second will run in whatever context the event handling mechanism decides. If it is something like this, it will run with this being the global object:
function on (a, callback) {
callback(); // callback is run with this as the global object
// UNLESS it was bound to something else
}
The 'private' _handlers property is just an object that holds references to callbacks bound to the instance. If you were to call bind twice, two functions would be created. The _handlers property makes it so that a single bound function is created which can be used as a handler for any number of events.

Calling bind() with a context

I am working on a website where various objects bind to common events on $(window). However, I want to run these functions within the context of the objects that receive the triggers. (In other words, preserve "this" so it still refers to the object instead of the window when it calls the function.) How can I do this? For example, inside the object:
var someNum = 1;
$(window).bind("test", printNum);
function printNum() {
alert(this.someNum); // should return 1
}

Check out $.proxy, which you can use to create a function that always has a particular context:
$(window).bind("test", $.proxy(printNum, this));
Also, on is preferred over bind as of jQuery 1.7.

I have never been clear about object context in JavaScript, but I have been successful using this method. Laugh or admire it:
this.someNum = 1;
$(window).bind("test", printNum);
var parent = this;
function printNum() {
alert(parent.someNum); // should return 1
}