Develop Reference

JavaScript: Access object field that has dot as key [duplicate]

Given a JavaScript object,
var obj = { a: { b: '1', c: '2' } }
and a string
"a.b"
how can I convert the string to dot notation so I can go
var val = obj.a.b
If the string was just 'a', I could use obj[a]. But this is more complex. I imagine there is some straightforward method, but it escapes me at present.

recent note: While I'm flattered that this answer has gotten many upvotes, I am also somewhat horrified. If one needs to convert dot-notation strings like "x.a.b.c" into references, it could (maybe) be a sign that there is something very wrong going on (unless maybe you're performing some strange deserialization).
That is to say, novices who find their way to this answer must ask themselves the question "why am I doing this?"
It is of course generally fine to do this if your use case is small and you will not run into performance issues, AND you won't need to build upon your abstraction to make it more complicated later. In fact, if this will reduce code complexity and keep things simple, you should probably go ahead and do what OP is asking for. However, if that's not the case, consider if any of these apply:
case 1: As the primary method of working with your data (e.g. as your app's default form of passing objects around and dereferencing them). Like asking "how can I look up a function or variable name from a string".
This is bad programming practice (unnecessary metaprogramming specifically, and kind of violates function side-effect-free coding style, and will have performance hits). Novices who find themselves in this case, should instead consider working with array representations, e.g. ['x','a','b','c'], or even something more direct/simple/straightforward if possible: like not losing track of the references themselves in the first place (most ideal if it's only client-side or only server-side), etc. (A pre-existing unique id would be inelegant to add, but could be used if the spec otherwise requires its existence regardless.)
case 2: Working with serialized data, or data that will be displayed to the user. Like using a date as a string "1999-12-30" rather than a Date object (which can cause timezone bugs or added serialization complexity if not careful). Or you know what you're doing.
This is maybe fine. Be careful that there are no dot strings "." in your sanitized input fragments.
If you find yourself using this answer all the time and converting back and forth between string and array, you may be in the bad case, and should consider an alternative.
Here's an elegant one-liner that's 10x shorter than the other solutions:
function index(obj,i) {return obj[i]}
'a.b.etc'.split('.').reduce(index, obj)
[edit] Or in ECMAScript 6:
'a.b.etc'.split('.').reduce((o,i)=> o[i], obj)
(Not that I think eval always bad like others suggest it is (though it usually is), nevertheless those people will be pleased that this method doesn't use eval. The above will find obj.a.b.etc given obj and the string "a.b.etc".)
In response to those who still are afraid of using reduce despite it being in the ECMA-262 standard (5th edition), here is a two-line recursive implementation:
function multiIndex(obj,is) { // obj,['1','2','3'] -> ((obj['1'])['2'])['3']
return is.length ? multiIndex(obj[is[0]],is.slice(1)) : obj
}
function pathIndex(obj,is) { // obj,'1.2.3' -> multiIndex(obj,['1','2','3'])
return multiIndex(obj,is.split('.'))
}
pathIndex('a.b.etc')
Depending on the optimizations the JS compiler is doing, you may want to make sure any nested functions are not re-defined on every call via the usual methods (placing them in a closure, object, or global namespace).
edit:
To answer an interesting question in the comments:
how would you turn this into a setter as well? Not only returning the values by path, but also setting them if a new value is sent into the function? – Swader Jun 28 at 21:42
(sidenote: sadly can't return an object with a Setter, as that would violate the calling convention; commenter seems to instead be referring to a general setter-style function with side-effects like index(obj,"a.b.etc", value) doing obj.a.b.etc = value.)
The reduce style is not really suitable to that, but we can modify the recursive implementation:
function index(obj,is, value) {
if (typeof is == 'string')
return index(obj,is.split('.'), value);
else if (is.length==1 && value!==undefined)
return obj[is[0]] = value;
else if (is.length==0)
return obj;
else
return index(obj[is[0]],is.slice(1), value);
}
Demo:
> obj = {a:{b:{etc:5}}}
> index(obj,'a.b.etc')
5
> index(obj,['a','b','etc']) #works with both strings and lists
5
> index(obj,'a.b.etc', 123) #setter-mode - third argument (possibly poor form)
123
> index(obj,'a.b.etc')
123
...though personally I'd recommend making a separate function setIndex(...). I would like to end on a side-note that the original poser of the question could (should?) be working with arrays of indices (which they can get from .split), rather than strings; though there's usually nothing wrong with a convenience function.
A commenter asked:
what about arrays? something like "a.b[4].c.d[1][2][3]" ? –AlexS
Javascript is a very weird language; in general objects can only have strings as their property keys, so for example if x was a generic object like x={}, then x[1] would become x["1"]... you read that right... yup...
Javascript Arrays (which are themselves instances of Object) specifically encourage integer keys, even though you could do something like x=[]; x["puppy"]=5;.
But in general (and there are exceptions), x["somestring"]===x.somestring (when it's allowed; you can't do x.123).
(Keep in mind that whatever JS compiler you're using might choose, maybe, to compile these down to saner representations if it can prove it would not violate the spec.)
So the answer to your question would depend on whether you're assuming those objects only accept integers (due to a restriction in your problem domain), or not. Let's assume not. Then a valid expression is a concatenation of a base identifier plus some .identifiers plus some ["stringindex"]s.
Let us ignore for a moment that we can of course do other things legitimately in the grammar like identifier[0xFA7C25DD].asdf[f(4)?.[5]+k][false][null][undefined][NaN]; integers are not (that) 'special'.
Commenter's statement would then be equivalent to a["b"][4]["c"]["d"][1][2][3], though we should probably also support a.b["c\"validjsstringliteral"][3]. You'd have to check the ecmascript grammar section on string literals to see how to parse a valid string literal. Technically you'd also want to check (unlike in my first answer) that a is a valid javascript identifier.
A simple answer to your question though, if your strings don't contain commas or brackets, would be just be to match length 1+ sequences of characters not in the set , or [ or ]:
> "abc[4].c.def[1][2][\"gh\"]".match(/[^\]\[.]+/g)
// ^^^ ^ ^ ^^^ ^ ^ ^^^^^
["abc", "4", "c", "def", "1", "2", ""gh""]
If your strings don't contain escape characters or " characters, and because IdentifierNames are a sublanguage of StringLiterals (I think???) you could first convert your dots to []:
> var R=[], demoString="abc[4].c.def[1][2][\"gh\"]";
> for(var match,matcher=/^([^\.\[]+)|\.([^\.\[]+)|\["([^"]+)"\]|\[(\d+)\]/g;
match=matcher.exec(demoString); ) {
R.push(Array.from(match).slice(1).filter(x=> x!==undefined)[0]);
// extremely bad code because js regexes are weird, don't use this
}
> R
["abc", "4", "c", "def", "1", "2", "gh"]
Of course, always be careful and never trust your data. Some bad ways to do this that might work for some use cases also include:
// hackish/wrongish; preprocess your string into "a.b.4.c.d.1.2.3", e.g.:
> yourstring.replace(/]/g,"").replace(/\[/g,".").split(".")
"a.b.4.c.d.1.2.3" //use code from before
Special 2018 edit:
Let's go full-circle and do the most inefficient, horribly-overmetaprogrammed solution we can come up with... in the interest of syntactical purityhamfistery. With ES6 Proxy objects!... Let's also define some properties which (imho are fine and wonderful but) may break improperly-written libraries. You should perhaps be wary of using this if you care about performance, sanity (yours or others'), your job, etc.
// [1,2,3][-1]==3 (or just use .slice(-1)[0])
if (![1][-1])
Object.defineProperty(Array.prototype, -1, {get() {return this[this.length-1]}}); //credit to caub
// WARNING: THIS XTREME™ RADICAL METHOD IS VERY INEFFICIENT,
// ESPECIALLY IF INDEXING INTO MULTIPLE OBJECTS,
// because you are constantly creating wrapper objects on-the-fly and,
// even worse, going through Proxy i.e. runtime ~reflection, which prevents
// compiler optimization
// Proxy handler to override obj[*]/obj.* and obj[*]=...
var hyperIndexProxyHandler = {
get: function(obj,key, proxy) {
return key.split('.').reduce((o,i)=> o[i], obj);
},
set: function(obj,key,value, proxy) {
var keys = key.split('.');
var beforeLast = keys.slice(0,-1).reduce((o,i)=> o[i], obj);
beforeLast[keys[-1]] = value;
},
has: function(obj,key) {
//etc
}
};
function hyperIndexOf(target) {
return new Proxy(target, hyperIndexProxyHandler);
}
Demo:
var obj = {a:{b:{c:1, d:2}}};
console.log("obj is:", JSON.stringify(obj));
var objHyper = hyperIndexOf(obj);
console.log("(proxy override get) objHyper['a.b.c'] is:", objHyper['a.b.c']);
objHyper['a.b.c'] = 3;
console.log("(proxy override set) objHyper['a.b.c']=3, now obj is:", JSON.stringify(obj));
console.log("(behind the scenes) objHyper is:", objHyper);
if (!({}).H)
Object.defineProperties(Object.prototype, {
H: {
get: function() {
return hyperIndexOf(this); // TODO:cache as a non-enumerable property for efficiency?
}
}
});
console.log("(shortcut) obj.H['a.b.c']=4");
obj.H['a.b.c'] = 4;
console.log("(shortcut) obj.H['a.b.c'] is obj['a']['b']['c'] is", obj.H['a.b.c']);
Output:
obj is: {"a":{"b":{"c":1,"d":2}}}
(proxy override get) objHyper['a.b.c'] is: 1
(proxy override set) objHyper['a.b.c']=3, now obj is: {"a":{"b":{"c":3,"d":2}}}
(behind the scenes) objHyper is: Proxy {a: {…}}
(shortcut) obj.H['a.b.c']=4
(shortcut) obj.H['a.b.c'] is obj['a']['b']['c'] is: 4
inefficient idea: You can modify the above to dispatch based on the input argument; either use the .match(/[^\]\[.]+/g) method to support obj['keys'].like[3]['this'], or if instanceof Array, then just accept an Array as input like keys = ['a','b','c']; obj.H[keys].
Per suggestion that maybe you want to handle undefined indices in a 'softer' NaN-style manner (e.g. index({a:{b:{c:...}}}, 'a.x.c') return undefined rather than uncaught TypeError)...:
This makes sense from the perspective of "we should return undefined rather than throw an error" in the 1-dimensional index situation ({})['e.g.']==undefined, so "we should return undefined rather than throw an error" in the N-dimensional situation.
This does not make sense from the perspective that we are doing x['a']['x']['c'], which would fail with a TypeError in the above example.
That said, you'd make this work by replacing your reducing function with either:
(o,i)=> o===undefined?undefined:o[i], or
(o,i)=> (o||{})[i].
(You can make this more efficient by using a for loop and breaking/returning whenever the subresult you'd next index into is undefined, or using a try-catch if you expect such failures to be sufficiently rare.)

If you can use Lodash, there is a function, which does exactly that:
_.get(object, path, [defaultValue])
var val = _.get(obj, "a.b");

You could use lodash.get
After installing (npm i lodash.get), use it like this:
const get = require('lodash.get');
const myObj = {
user: {
firstName: 'Stacky',
lastName: 'Overflowy',
list: ['zero', 'one', 'two']
},
id: 123
};
console.log(get(myObj, 'user.firstName')); // outputs Stacky
console.log(get(myObj, 'id')); // outputs 123
console.log(get(myObj, 'user.list[1]')); // outputs one
// You can also update values
get(myObj, 'user').firstName = 'John';

A little more involved example with recursion.
function recompose(obj, string) {
var parts = string.split('.');
var newObj = obj[parts[0]];
if (parts[1]) {
parts.splice(0, 1);
var newString = parts.join('.');
return recompose(newObj, newString);
}
return newObj;
}
var obj = { a: { b: '1', c: '2', d:{a:{b:'blah'}}}};
console.log(recompose(obj, 'a.d.a.b')); //blah

2021
You don't need to pull in another dependency every time you wish for new capabilities in your program. Modern JS is very capable and the optional-chaining operator ?. is now widely supported and makes this kind of task easy as heck.
With a single line of code we can write get that takes an input object, t and string path. It works for object and arrays of any nesting level -
const get = (t, path) =>
path.split(".").reduce((r, k) => r?.[k], t)
const mydata =
{ a: { b: [ 0, { c: { d: [ "hello", "world" ] } } ] } }
console.log(get(mydata, "a.b.1.c.d.0"))
console.log(get(mydata, "a.b.1.c.d.1"))
console.log(get(mydata, "a.b.x.y.z"))
"hello"
"world"
undefined

I suggest to split the path and iterate it and reduce the object you have. This proposal works with a default value for missing properties.
const getValue = (object, keys) => keys.split('.').reduce((o, k) => (o || {})[k], object);
console.log(getValue({ a: { b: '1', c: '2' } }, 'a.b'));
console.log(getValue({ a: { b: '1', c: '2' } }, 'foo.bar.baz'));

Many years since the original post.
Now there is a great library called 'object-path'.
https://github.com/mariocasciaro/object-path
Available on NPM and BOWER
https://www.npmjs.com/package/object-path
It's as easy as:
objectPath.get(obj, "a.c.1"); //returns "f"
objectPath.set(obj, "a.j.0.f", "m");
And works for deeply nested properties and arrays.

If you expect to dereference the same path many times, building a function for each dot notation path actually has the best performance by far (expanding on the perf tests James Wilkins linked to in comments above).
var path = 'a.b.x';
var getter = new Function("obj", "return obj." + path + ";");
getter(obj);
Using the Function constructor has some of the same drawbacks as eval() in terms of security and worst-case performance, but IMO it's a badly underused tool for cases where you need a combination of extreme dynamism and high performance. I use this methodology to build array filter functions and call them inside an AngularJS digest loop. My profiles consistently show the array.filter() step taking less than 1ms to dereference and filter about 2000 complex objects, using dynamically-defined paths 3-4 levels deep.
A similar methodology could be used to create setter functions, of course:
var setter = new Function("obj", "newval", "obj." + path + " = newval;");
setter(obj, "some new val");

Other proposals are a little cryptic, so I thought I'd contribute:
Object.prop = function(obj, prop, val){
var props = prop.split('.')
, final = props.pop(), p
while(p = props.shift()){
if (typeof obj[p] === 'undefined')
return undefined;
obj = obj[p]
}
return val ? (obj[final] = val) : obj[final]
}
var obj = { a: { b: '1', c: '2' } }
// get
console.log(Object.prop(obj, 'a.c')) // -> 2
// set
Object.prop(obj, 'a.c', function(){})
console.log(obj) // -> { a: { b: '1', c: [Function] } }

var a = { b: { c: 9 } };
function value(layer, path, value) {
var i = 0,
path = path.split('.');
for (; i < path.length; i++)
if (value != null && i + 1 === path.length)
layer[path[i]] = value;
layer = layer[path[i]];
return layer;
};
value(a, 'b.c'); // 9
value(a, 'b.c', 4);
value(a, 'b.c'); // 4
This is a lot of code when compared to the much simpler eval way of doing it, but like Simon Willison says, you should never use eval.
Also, JSFiddle.

You can use the library available at npm, which simplifies this process. https://www.npmjs.com/package/dot-object
var dot = require('dot-object');
var obj = {
some: {
nested: {
value: 'Hi there!'
}
}
};
var val = dot.pick('some.nested.value', obj);
console.log(val);
// Result: Hi there!

Note if you're already using Lodash you can use the property or get functions:
var obj = { a: { b: '1', c: '2' } };
_.property('a.b')(obj); // => 1
_.get(obj, 'a.b'); // => 1
Underscore.js also has a property function, but it doesn't support dot notation.

I have extended the elegant answer by ninjagecko so that the function handles both dotted and/or array style references, and so that an empty string causes the parent object to be returned.
Here you go:
string_to_ref = function (object, reference) {
function arr_deref(o, ref, i) { return !ref ? o : (o[ref.slice(0, i ? -1 : ref.length)]) }
function dot_deref(o, ref) { return ref.split('[').reduce(arr_deref, o); }
return !reference ? object : reference.split('.').reduce(dot_deref, object);
};
See my working jsFiddle example here: http://jsfiddle.net/sc0ttyd/q7zyd/

You can obtain value of an object member by dot notation with a single line of code:
new Function('_', 'return _.' + path)(obj);
In you case:
var obj = { a: { b: '1', c: '2' } }
var val = new Function('_', 'return _.a.b')(obj);
To make it simple you may write a function like this:
function objGet(obj, path){
return new Function('_', 'return _.' + path)(obj);
}
Explanation:
The Function constructor creates a new Function object. In JavaScript every function is actually a Function object. Syntax to create a function explicitly with Function constructor is:
new Function ([arg1[, arg2[, ...argN]],] functionBody)
where arguments(arg1 to argN) must be a string that corresponds to a valid javaScript identifier and functionBody is a string containing the javaScript statements comprising the function definition.
In our case we take the advantage of string function body to retrieve object member with dot notation.
Hope it helps.

var find = function(root, path) {
var segments = path.split('.'),
cursor = root,
target;
for (var i = 0; i < segments.length; ++i) {
target = cursor[segments[i]];
if (typeof target == "undefined") return void 0;
cursor = target;
}
return cursor;
};
var obj = { a: { b: '1', c: '2' } }
find(obj, "a.b"); // 1
var set = function (root, path, value) {
var segments = path.split('.'),
cursor = root,
target;
for (var i = 0; i < segments.length - 1; ++i) {
cursor = cursor[segments[i]] || { };
}
cursor[segments[segments.length - 1]] = value;
};
set(obj, "a.k", function () { console.log("hello world"); });
find(obj, "a.k")(); // hello world

Use this function:
function dotToObject(data) {
function index(parent, key, value) {
const [mainKey, ...children] = key.split(".");
parent[mainKey] = parent[mainKey] || {};
if (children.length === 1) {
parent[mainKey][children[0]] = value;
} else {
index(parent[mainKey], children.join("."), value);
}
}
const result = Object.entries(data).reduce((acc, [key, value]) => {
if (key.includes(".")) {
index(acc, key, value);
} else {
acc[key] = value;
}
return acc;
}, {});
return result;
}
module.exports = { dotToObject };
Ex:
const user = {
id: 1,
name: 'My name',
'address.zipCode': '123',
'address.name': 'Some name',
'address.something.id': 1,
}
const mappedUser = dotToObject(user)
console.log(JSON.stringify(mappedUser, null, 2))
Output:
{
"id": 1,
"name": "My name",
"address": {
"zipCode": "123",
"name": "Some name",
"something": {
"id": 1
}
}
}

using Array Reduce function will get/set based on path provided.
I tested it with a.b.c and a.b.2.c {a:{b:[0,1,{c:7}]}} and its works for both getting key or mutating object to set value
function setOrGet(obj, path=[], newValue){
const l = typeof path === 'string' ? path.split('.') : path;
return l.reduce((carry,item, idx)=>{
const leaf = carry[item];
// is this last item in path ? cool lets set/get value
if( l.length-idx===1) {
// mutate object if newValue is set;
carry[item] = newValue===undefined ? leaf : newValue;
// return value if its a get/object if it was a set
return newValue===undefined ? leaf : obj ;
}
carry[item] = leaf || {}; // mutate if key not an object;
return carry[item]; // return object ref: to continue reduction;
}, obj)
}
console.log(
setOrGet({a: {b:1}},'a.b') === 1 ||
'Test Case: Direct read failed'
)
console.log(
setOrGet({a: {b:1}},'a.c',22).a.c===22 ||
'Test Case: Direct set failed'
)
console.log(
setOrGet({a: {b:[1,2]}},'a.b.1',22).a.b[1]===22 ||
'Test Case: Direct set on array failed'
)
console.log(
setOrGet({a: {b:{c: {e:1} }}},'a.b.c.e',22).a.b.c. e===22 ||
'Test Case: deep get failed'
)
// failed !. Thats your homework :)
console.log(
setOrGet({a: {b:{c: {e:[1,2,3,4,5]} }}},'a.b.c.e.3 ',22)
)
my personal recommendation.
do not use such a thing unless there is no other way!
i saw many examples people use it for translations for example from json; so you see function like locale('app.homepage.welcome') . this is just bad. if you already have data in an object/json; and you know path.. then just use it directly example locale().app.homepage.welcome by changing you function to return object you get typesafe, with autocomplete, less prone to typo's ..

I copied the following from Ricardo Tomasi's answer and modified to also create sub-objects that don't yet exist as necessary. It's a little less efficient (more ifs and creating of empty objects), but should be pretty good.
Also, it'll allow us to do Object.prop(obj, 'a.b', false) where we couldn't before. Unfortunately, it still won't let us assign undefined...Not sure how to go about that one yet.
/**
* Object.prop()
*
* Allows dot-notation access to object properties for both getting and setting.
*
* #param {Object} obj The object we're getting from or setting
* #param {string} prop The dot-notated string defining the property location
* #param {mixed} val For setting only; the value to set
*/
Object.prop = function(obj, prop, val){
var props = prop.split('.'),
final = props.pop(),
p;
for (var i = 0; i < props.length; i++) {
p = props[i];
if (typeof obj[p] === 'undefined') {
// If we're setting
if (typeof val !== 'undefined') {
// If we're not at the end of the props, keep adding new empty objects
if (i != props.length)
obj[p] = {};
}
else
return undefined;
}
obj = obj[p]
}
return typeof val !== "undefined" ? (obj[final] = val) : obj[final]
}

Few years later, I found this that handles scope and array. e.g. a['b']["c"].d.etc
function getScopedObj(scope, str) {
let obj=scope, arr;
try {
arr = str.split(/[\[\]\.]/) // split by [,],.
.filter(el => el) // filter out empty one
.map(el => el.replace(/^['"]+|['"]+$/g, '')); // remove string quotation
arr.forEach(el => obj = obj[el])
} catch(e) {
obj = undefined;
}
return obj;
}
window.a = {b: {c: {d: {etc: 'success'}}}}
getScopedObj(window, `a.b.c.d.etc`) // success
getScopedObj(window, `a['b']["c"].d.etc`) // success
getScopedObj(window, `a['INVALID']["c"].d.etc`) // undefined

If you wish to convert any object that contains dot notation keys into an arrayed version of those keys you can use this.
This will convert something like
{
name: 'Andy',
brothers.0: 'Bob'
brothers.1: 'Steve'
brothers.2: 'Jack'
sisters.0: 'Sally'
}
to
{
name: 'Andy',
brothers: ['Bob', 'Steve', 'Jack']
sisters: ['Sally']
}
convertDotNotationToArray(objectWithDotNotation) {
Object.entries(objectWithDotNotation).forEach(([key, val]) => {
// Is the key of dot notation
if (key.includes('.')) {
const [name, index] = key.split('.');
// If you have not created an array version, create one
if (!objectWithDotNotation[name]) {
objectWithDotNotation[name] = new Array();
}
// Save the value in the newly created array at the specific index
objectWithDotNotation[name][index] = val;
// Delete the current dot notation key val
delete objectWithDotNotation[key];
}
});
}

If you want to convert a string dot notation into an object, I've made a handy little helper than can turn a string like a.b.c.d with a value of e with dotPathToObject("a.b.c.d", "value") returning this:
{
"a": {
"b": {
"c": {
"d": "value"
}
}
}
}
https://gist.github.com/ahallora/9731d73efb15bd3d3db647efa3389c12

Solution:
function deepFind(key, data){
return key.split('.').reduce((ob,i)=> ob?.[i], data)
}
Usage:
const obj = {
company: "Pet Shop",
person: {
name: "John"
},
animal: {
name: "Lucky"
}
}
const company = deepFind("company", obj)
const personName = deepFind("person.name", obj)
const animalName = deepFind("animal.name", obj)

Here is my implementation
Implementation 1
Object.prototype.access = function() {
var ele = this[arguments[0]];
if(arguments.length === 1) return ele;
return ele.access.apply(ele, [].slice.call(arguments, 1));
}
Implementation 2 (using array reduce instead of slice)
Object.prototype.access = function() {
var self = this;
return [].reduce.call(arguments,function(prev,cur) {
return prev[cur];
}, self);
}
Examples:
var myobj = {'a':{'b':{'c':{'d':'abcd','e':[11,22,33]}}}};
myobj.access('a','b','c'); // returns: {'d':'abcd', e:[0,1,2,3]}
myobj.a.b.access('c','d'); // returns: 'abcd'
myobj.access('a','b','c','e',0); // returns: 11
it can also handle objects inside arrays as for
var myobj2 = {'a': {'b':[{'c':'ab0c'},{'d':'ab1d'}]}}
myobj2.access('a','b','1','d'); // returns: 'ab1d'

I used this code in my project
const getValue = (obj, arrPath) => (
arrPath.reduce((x, y) => {
if (y in x) return x[y]
return {}
}, obj)
)
Usage:
const obj = { id: { user: { local: 104 } } }
const path = [ 'id', 'user', 'local' ]
getValue(obj, path) // return 104

Using object-scan seems a bit overkill, but you can simply do
// const objectScan = require('object-scan');
const get = (obj, p) => objectScan([p], { abort: true, rtn: 'value' })(obj);
const obj = { a: { b: '1', c: '2' } };
console.log(get(obj, 'a.b'));
// => 1
console.log(get(obj, '*.c'));
// => 2
.as-console-wrapper {max-height: 100% !important; top: 0}
<script src="https://bundle.run/object-scan#13.7.1"></script>
Disclaimer: I'm the author of object-scan
There are a lot more advanced examples in the readme.

This is one of those cases, where you ask 10 developers and you get 10 answers.
Below is my [simplified] solution for OP, using dynamic programming.
The idea is that you would pass an existing DTO object that you wish to UPDATE. This makes the method most useful in the case where you have a form with several input elements having name attributes set with dot (fluent) syntax.
Example use:
<input type="text" name="person.contact.firstName" />
Code snippet:
const setFluently = (obj, path, value) => {
if (typeof path === "string") {
return setFluently(obj, path.split("."), value);
}
if (path.length <= 1) {
obj[path[0]] = value;
return obj;
}
const key = path[0];
obj[key] = setFluently(obj[key] ? obj[key] : {}, path.slice(1), value);
return obj;
};
const origObj = {
a: {
b: "1",
c: "2"
}
};
setFluently(origObj, "a.b", "3");
setFluently(origObj, "a.c", "4");
console.log(JSON.stringify(origObj, null, 3));

function at(obj, path, val = undefined) {
// If path is an Array,
if (Array.isArray(path)) {
// it returns the mapped array for each result of the path
return path.map((path) => at(obj, path, val));
}
// Uniting several RegExps into one
const rx = new RegExp(
[
/(?:^(?:\.\s*)?([_a-zA-Z][_a-zA-Z0-9]*))/,
/(?:^\[\s*(\d+)\s*\])/,
/(?:^\[\s*'([^']*(?:\\'[^']*)*)'\s*\])/,
/(?:^\[\s*"([^"]*(?:\\"[^"]*)*)"\s*\])/,
/(?:^\[\s*`([^`]*(?:\\`[^`]*)*)`\s*\])/,
]
.map((r) => r.source)
.join("|")
);
let rm;
while (rm = rx.exec(path.trim())) {
// Matched resource
let [rf, rp] = rm.filter(Boolean);
// If no one matches found,
if (!rm[1] && !rm[2]) {
// it will replace escape-chars
rp = rp.replace(/\\(.)/g, "$1");
}
// If the new value is set,
if ("undefined" != typeof val && path.length == rf.length) {
// assign a value to the object property and return it
return (obj[rp] = val);
}
// Going one step deeper
obj = obj[rp];
// Removing a step from the path
path = path.substr(rf.length).trim();
}
if (path) {
throw new SyntaxError();
}
return obj;
}
// Test object schema
let o = { a: { b: [ [ { c: { d: { '"e"': { f: { g: "xxx" } } } } } ] ] } };
// Print source object
console.log(JSON.stringify(o));
// Set value
console.log(at(o, '.a["b"][0][0].c[`d`]["\\"e\\""][\'f\']["g"]', "zzz"));
// Get value
console.log(at(o, '.a["b"][0][0].c[`d`]["\\"e\\""][\'f\']["g"]'));
// Print result object
console.log(JSON.stringify(o));

Here is my code without using eval. It’s easy to understand too.
function value(obj, props) {
if (!props)
return obj;
var propsArr = props.split('.');
var prop = propsArr.splice(0, 1);
return value(obj[prop], propsArr.join('.'));
}
var obj = { a: { b: '1', c: '2', d:{a:{b:'blah'}}}};
console.log(value(obj, 'a.d.a.b')); // Returns blah

Yes, extending base prototypes is not usually good idea but, if you keep all extensions in one place, they might be useful.
So, here is my way to do this.
Object.defineProperty(Object.prototype, "getNestedProperty", {
value : function (propertyName) {
var result = this;
var arr = propertyName.split(".");
while (arr.length && result) {
result = result[arr.shift()];
}
return result;
},
enumerable: false
});
Now you will be able to get nested property everywhere without importing module with function or copy/pasting function.
Example:
{a:{b:11}}.getNestedProperty('a.b'); // Returns 11
The Next.js extension broke Mongoose in my project. Also I've read that it might break jQuery. So, never do it in the Next.js way:
Object.prototype.getNestedProperty = function (propertyName) {
var result = this;
var arr = propertyName.split(".");
while (arr.length && result) {
result = result[arr.shift()];
}
return result;
};

This is my extended solution proposed by ninjagecko.
For me, simple string notation was not enough, so the below version supports things like:
index(obj, 'data.accounts[0].address[0].postcode');
 
/**
* Get object by index
* #supported
* - arrays supported
* - array indexes supported
* #not-supported
* - multiple arrays
* #issues:
* index(myAccount, 'accounts[0].address[0].id') - works fine
* index(myAccount, 'accounts[].address[0].id') - doesnt work
* #Example:
* index(obj, 'data.accounts[].id') => returns array of id's
* index(obj, 'data.accounts[0].id') => returns id of 0 element from array
* index(obj, 'data.accounts[0].addresses.list[0].id') => error
* #param obj
* #param path
* #returns {any}
*/
var index = function(obj, path, isArray?, arrIndex?){
// is an array
if(typeof isArray === 'undefined') isArray = false;
// array index,
// if null, will take all indexes
if(typeof arrIndex === 'undefined') arrIndex = null;
var _arrIndex = null;
var reduceArrayTag = function(i, subArrIndex){
return i.replace(/(\[)([\d]{0,})(\])/, (i) => {
var tmp = i.match(/(\[)([\d]{0,})(\])/);
isArray = true;
if(subArrIndex){
_arrIndex = (tmp[2] !== '') ? tmp[2] : null;
}else{
arrIndex = (tmp[2] !== '') ? tmp[2] : null;
}
return '';
});
}
function byIndex(obj, i) {
// if is an array
if(isArray){
isArray = false;
i = reduceArrayTag(i, true);
// if array index is null,
// return an array of with values from every index
if(!arrIndex){
var arrValues = [];
_.forEach(obj, (el) => {
arrValues.push(index(el, i, isArray, arrIndex));
})
return arrValues;
}
// if array index is specified
var value = obj[arrIndex][i];
if(isArray){
arrIndex = _arrIndex;
}else{
arrIndex = null;
}
return value;
}else{
// remove [] from notation,
// if [] has been removed, check the index of array
i = reduceArrayTag(i, false);
return obj[i]
}
}
// reduce with the byIndex method
return path.split('.').reduce(byIndex, obj)
}

Declare Multi Dimensional Array in Package.json [duplicate]

I have a JavaScript object. Is there a built-in or accepted best practice way to get the length of this object?
const myObject = new Object();
myObject["firstname"] = "Gareth";
myObject["lastname"] = "Simpson";
myObject["age"] = 21;

Updated answer
Here's an update as of 2016 and widespread deployment of ES5 and beyond. For IE9+ and all other modern ES5+ capable browsers, you can use Object.keys() so the above code just becomes:
var size = Object.keys(myObj).length;
This doesn't have to modify any existing prototype since Object.keys() is now built-in.
Edit: Objects can have symbolic properties that can not be returned via Object.key method. So the answer would be incomplete without mentioning them.
Symbol type was added to the language to create unique identifiers for object properties. The main benefit of the Symbol type is the prevention of overwrites.
Object.keys or Object.getOwnPropertyNames does not work for symbolic properties. To return them you need to use Object.getOwnPropertySymbols.
var person = {
[Symbol('name')]: 'John Doe',
[Symbol('age')]: 33,
"occupation": "Programmer"
};
const propOwn = Object.getOwnPropertyNames(person);
console.log(propOwn.length); // 1
let propSymb = Object.getOwnPropertySymbols(person);
console.log(propSymb.length); // 2
Older answer
The most robust answer (i.e. that captures the intent of what you're trying to do while causing the fewest bugs) would be:
Object.size = function(obj) {
var size = 0,
key;
for (key in obj) {
if (obj.hasOwnProperty(key)) size++;
}
return size;
};
// Get the size of an object
const myObj = {}
var size = Object.size(myObj);
There's a sort of convention in JavaScript that you don't add things to Object.prototype, because it can break enumerations in various libraries. Adding methods to Object is usually safe, though.

If you know you don't have to worry about hasOwnProperty checks, you can use the Object.keys() method in this way:
Object.keys(myArray).length

Updated: If you're using Underscore.js (recommended, it's lightweight!), then you can just do
_.size({one : 1, two : 2, three : 3});
=> 3
If not, and you don't want to mess around with Object properties for whatever reason, and are already using jQuery, a plugin is equally accessible:
$.assocArraySize = function(obj) {
// http://stackoverflow.com/a/6700/11236
var size = 0, key;
for (key in obj) {
if (obj.hasOwnProperty(key)) size++;
}
return size;
};

Here's the most cross-browser solution.
This is better than the accepted answer because it uses native Object.keys if exists.
Thus, it is the fastest for all modern browsers.
if (!Object.keys) {
Object.keys = function (obj) {
var arr = [],
key;
for (key in obj) {
if (obj.hasOwnProperty(key)) {
arr.push(key);
}
}
return arr;
};
}
Object.keys(obj).length;

Simply use this to get the length:
Object.keys(myObject).length

I'm not a JavaScript expert, but it looks like you would have to loop through the elements and count them since Object doesn't have a length method:
var element_count = 0;
for (e in myArray) { if (myArray.hasOwnProperty(e)) element_count++; }
#palmsey: In fairness to the OP, the JavaScript documentation actually explicitly refer to using variables of type Object in this manner as "associative arrays".

This method gets all your object's property names in an array, so you can get the length of that array which is equal to your object's keys' length.
Object.getOwnPropertyNames({"hi":"Hi","msg":"Message"}).length; // => 2

To not mess with the prototype or other code, you could build and extend your own object:
function Hash(){
var length=0;
this.add = function(key, val){
if(this[key] == undefined)
{
length++;
}
this[key]=val;
};
this.length = function(){
return length;
};
}
myArray = new Hash();
myArray.add("lastname", "Simpson");
myArray.add("age", 21);
alert(myArray.length()); // will alert 2
If you always use the add method, the length property will be correct. If you're worried that you or others forget about using it, you could add the property counter which the others have posted to the length method, too.
Of course, you could always overwrite the methods. But even if you do, your code would probably fail noticeably, making it easy to debug. ;)

We can find the length of Object by using:
const myObject = {};
console.log(Object.values(myObject).length);

Here's how and don't forget to check that the property is not on the prototype chain:
var element_count = 0;
for(var e in myArray)
if(myArray.hasOwnProperty(e))
element_count++;

Here is a completely different solution that will only work in more modern browsers (Internet Explorer 9+, Chrome, Firefox 4+, Opera 11.60+, and Safari 5.1+)
See this jsFiddle.
Setup your associative array class
/**
* #constructor
*/
AssociativeArray = function () {};
// Make the length property work
Object.defineProperty(AssociativeArray.prototype, "length", {
get: function () {
var count = 0;
for (var key in this) {
if (this.hasOwnProperty(key))
count++;
}
return count;
}
});
Now you can use this code as follows...
var a1 = new AssociativeArray();
a1["prop1"] = "test";
a1["prop2"] = 1234;
a1["prop3"] = "something else";
alert("Length of array is " + a1.length);

If you need an associative data structure that exposes its size, better use a map instead of an object.
const myMap = new Map();
myMap.set("firstname", "Gareth");
myMap.set("lastname", "Simpson");
myMap.set("age", 21);
console.log(myMap.size); // 3

Use Object.keys(myObject).length to get the length of object/array
var myObject = new Object();
myObject["firstname"] = "Gareth";
myObject["lastname"] = "Simpson";
myObject["age"] = 21;
console.log(Object.keys(myObject).length); //3

Use:
var myArray = new Object();
myArray["firstname"] = "Gareth";
myArray["lastname"] = "Simpson";
myArray["age"] = 21;
obj = Object.keys(myArray).length;
console.log(obj)

<script>
myObj = {"key1" : "Hello", "key2" : "Goodbye"};
var size = Object.keys(myObj).length;
console.log(size);
</script>
<p id="myObj">The number of <b>keys</b> in <b>myObj</b> are: <script>document.write(size)</script></p>
This works for me:
var size = Object.keys(myObj).length;

For some cases it is better to just store the size in a separate variable. Especially, if you're adding to the array by one element in one place and can easily increment the size. It would obviously work much faster if you need to check the size often.

The simplest way is like this:
Object.keys(myobject).length
Where myobject is the object of what you want the length of.

#palmsey: In fairness to the OP, the JavaScript documentation actually explicitly refer to using variables of type Object in this manner as "associative arrays".
And in fairness to #palmsey he was quite correct. They aren't associative arrays; they're definitely objects :) - doing the job of an associative array. But as regards to the wider point, you definitely seem to have the right of it according to this rather fine article I found:
JavaScript “Associative Arrays” Considered Harmful
But according to all this, the accepted answer itself is bad practice?
Specify a prototype size() function for Object
If anything else has been added to Object .prototype, then the suggested code will fail:
<script type="text/javascript">
Object.prototype.size = function () {
var len = this.length ? --this.length : -1;
for (var k in this)
len++;
return len;
}
Object.prototype.size2 = function () {
var len = this.length ? --this.length : -1;
for (var k in this)
len++;
return len;
}
var myArray = new Object();
myArray["firstname"] = "Gareth";
myArray["lastname"] = "Simpson";
myArray["age"] = 21;
alert("age is " + myArray["age"]);
alert("length is " + myArray.size());
</script>
I don't think that answer should be the accepted one as it can't be trusted to work if you have any other code running in the same execution context. To do it in a robust fashion, surely you would need to define the size method within myArray and check for the type of the members as you iterate through them.

If we have the hash
hash = {"a" : "b", "c": "d"};
we can get the length using the length of the keys which is the length of the hash:
keys(hash).length

Using the Object.entries method to get length is one way of achieving it
const objectLength = obj => Object.entries(obj).length;
const person = {
id: 1,
name: 'John',
age: 30
}
const car = {
type: 2,
color: 'red',
}
console.log(objectLength(person)); // 3
console.log(objectLength(car)); // 2

var myObject = new Object();
myObject["firstname"] = "Gareth";
myObject["lastname"] = "Simpson";
myObject["age"] = 21;
Object.values(myObject).length
Object.entries(myObject).length
Object.keys(myObject).length

What about something like this --
function keyValuePairs() {
this.length = 0;
function add(key, value) { this[key] = value; this.length++; }
function remove(key) { if (this.hasOwnProperty(key)) { delete this[key]; this.length--; }}
}

If you are using AngularJS 1.x you can do things the AngularJS way by creating a filter and using the code from any of the other examples such as the following:
// Count the elements in an object
app.filter('lengthOfObject', function() {
return function( obj ) {
var size = 0, key;
for (key in obj) {
if (obj.hasOwnProperty(key)) size++;
}
return size;
}
})
Usage
In your controller:
$scope.filterResult = $filter('lengthOfObject')($scope.object)
Or in your view:
<any ng-expression="object | lengthOfObject"></any>

const myObject = new Object();
myObject["firstname"] = "Gareth";
myObject["lastname"] = "Simpson";
myObject["age"] = 21;
console.log(Object.keys(myObject).length)
// o/p 3

A variation on some of the above is:
var objLength = function(obj){
var key,len=0;
for(key in obj){
len += Number( obj.hasOwnProperty(key) );
}
return len;
};
It is a bit more elegant way to integrate hasOwnProp.

If you don't care about supporting Internet Explorer 8 or lower, you can easily get the number of properties in an object by applying the following two steps:
Run either Object.keys() to get an array that contains the names of only those properties that are enumerable or Object.getOwnPropertyNames() if you want to also include the names of properties that are not enumerable.
Get the .length property of that array.
If you need to do this more than once, you could wrap this logic in a function:
function size(obj, enumerablesOnly) {
return enumerablesOnly === false ?
Object.getOwnPropertyNames(obj).length :
Object.keys(obj).length;
}
How to use this particular function:
var myObj = Object.create({}, {
getFoo: {},
setFoo: {}
});
myObj.Foo = 12;
var myArr = [1,2,5,4,8,15];
console.log(size(myObj)); // Output : 1
console.log(size(myObj, true)); // Output : 1
console.log(size(myObj, false)); // Output : 3
console.log(size(myArr)); // Output : 6
console.log(size(myArr, true)); // Output : 6
console.log(size(myArr, false)); // Output : 7
See also this Fiddle for a demo.

Here's a different version of James Cogan's answer. Instead of passing an argument, just prototype out the Object class and make the code cleaner.
Object.prototype.size = function () {
var size = 0,
key;
for (key in this) {
if (this.hasOwnProperty(key)) size++;
}
return size;
};
var x = {
one: 1,
two: 2,
three: 3
};
x.size() === 3;
jsfiddle example: http://jsfiddle.net/qar4j/1/

You can always do Object.getOwnPropertyNames(myObject).length to get the same result as [].length would give for normal array.

You can simply use Object.keys(obj).length on any object to get its length. Object.keys returns an array containing all of the object keys (properties) which can come in handy for finding the length of that object using the length of the corresponding array. You can even write a function for this. Let's get creative and write a method for it as well (along with a more convienient getter property):
function objLength(obj)
{
return Object.keys(obj).length;
}
console.log(objLength({a:1, b:"summit", c:"nonsense"}));
// Works perfectly fine
var obj = new Object();
obj['fish'] = 30;
obj['nullified content'] = null;
console.log(objLength(obj));
// It also works your way, which is creating it using the Object constructor
Object.prototype.getLength = function() {
return Object.keys(this).length;
}
console.log(obj.getLength());
// You can also write it as a method, which is more efficient as done so above
Object.defineProperty(Object.prototype, "length", {get:function(){
return Object.keys(this).length;
}});
console.log(obj.length);
// probably the most effictive approach is done so and demonstrated above which sets a getter property called "length" for objects which returns the equivalent value of getLength(this) or this.getLength()

A nice way to achieve this (Internet Explorer 9+ only) is to define a magic getter on the length property:
Object.defineProperty(Object.prototype, "length", {
get: function () {
return Object.keys(this).length;
}
});
And you can just use it like so:
var myObj = { 'key': 'value' };
myObj.length;
It would give 1.

Does Javascript have associative arrays?

Does Javascript have associative arrays? Please explain.

Nope; JavaScript arrays are just numeric keys and mixed values. The same thing can be achieved (or, actually, it's exactly the same as associative arrays in other languages) with objects:
var foo = {
a: 123,
b: 'CDE'
};
foo.a; // 123
foo['a']; // 123
You could use arrays:
var foo = [];
foo.a = 123;
foo.b = 'CDE';
foo.b; // CDE
foo['b']; // CDE
HOWEVER, this should never be done because this will not enter the key/value pairs into the array, but add them to the array object as properties. (besides, {a: 123} is easier than a = []; a.a = 123) If you need key/value pairs, use Objects. If you need an enumerated list, use arrays.

This answer is pretty much a copy-paste of my previous answer on this question.
The situation has changed in the five years since this question was asked.
Due to weak typing associative arrays can be faked in JavaScript:
>> var names = new Array();
undefined
>> names["first"] = "Dotan";
"Dotan"
>> names["last"] = "Cohen";
"Cohen"
>> for ( key in names ) { console.log(key+" "+names[key]) }
undefined
first Dotan
last Cohen
That is sometimes useful, and all browsers released since 2012 support it, but there are caveats! The array cannot be simply read back:
>> names
Array [ ]
More importantly, the array's length cannot be easily retrieved:
>> names.length
0
Therefore this is not an associative array in the sense that JavaScript would have supported it had it been intended, but rather a workaround that is often useful if for whatever reason a real JS object does not support what you need:
>> var names = {};
undefined
>> names.first = "Dotan";
"Dotan"
>> names.last = "Cohen";
"Cohen"
>> for ( key in names ) { console.log(key+" "+names[key]) }
undefined
first Dotan
last Cohen
>> names
Object { first: "Dotan", last: "Cohen" }
>> Object.keys(names).length
2

The closest we have is an object; the easiest way you can define this is using object literal syntax.
var assocArray = {
key: 1,
key2: 2
};
You should be wary of a few things however:
It does not have a .length property.
You should use for in to iterative over it, rather than for(;;;);, but should combine it with hasOwnProperty():
for (var x in assocArray) {
if (assocArray.hasOwnProperty(x)) {
// x = the key, assocArray[x] = the value
}
}
There is no concept of ordering/ sorting the members. Whilst all implementations I know of iterate the members in the order they were added, this is not standardised.

Instead of associative arrays. Javascript has objects. Properties of an object are addressed using a string.
var obj1 = {}; // declare empty object
var obj2 = {a: 1, b: 'string', c: [4,5]}; // obj with 3 properties, a, b, and c
// note that the 'c' property contains an anonymous array
alert(obj2.a); // shows 1
obj2.a = 'another string'; // redefine the 'a' property
obj2.cookie = 'oatmeal'; // add a new property to the object
obj2['ice_cream'] = {vendor: 'Beyers',
flavor: 'Chocolate Surprise'}; // add anonymous object as
// a new property for the object
assert(obj2.a === obj2['a']); // two ways to retrieve the value
var i = 'a'; // using an index varable
assert(obj2.a === obj2[i]); // note the i does not have apostrophes around it
See the Quirksmode docs

Something comparable in JavaScript is an object.
var my_obj = { key : 'value' }

Sure it does (kind of, use objects)
var foo = {
bar: "hello"
}
accessible with
foo.bar

Convert a JavaScript string in dot notation into an object reference

Given a JavaScript object,
var obj = { a: { b: '1', c: '2' } }
and a string
"a.b"
how can I convert the string to dot notation so I can go
var val = obj.a.b
If the string was just 'a', I could use obj[a]. But this is more complex. I imagine there is some straightforward method, but it escapes me at present.

recent note: While I'm flattered that this answer has gotten many upvotes, I am also somewhat horrified. If one needs to convert dot-notation strings like "x.a.b.c" into references, it could (maybe) be a sign that there is something very wrong going on (unless maybe you're performing some strange deserialization).
That is to say, novices who find their way to this answer must ask themselves the question "why am I doing this?"
It is of course generally fine to do this if your use case is small and you will not run into performance issues, AND you won't need to build upon your abstraction to make it more complicated later. In fact, if this will reduce code complexity and keep things simple, you should probably go ahead and do what OP is asking for. However, if that's not the case, consider if any of these apply:
case 1: As the primary method of working with your data (e.g. as your app's default form of passing objects around and dereferencing them). Like asking "how can I look up a function or variable name from a string".
This is bad programming practice (unnecessary metaprogramming specifically, and kind of violates function side-effect-free coding style, and will have performance hits). Novices who find themselves in this case, should instead consider working with array representations, e.g. ['x','a','b','c'], or even something more direct/simple/straightforward if possible: like not losing track of the references themselves in the first place (most ideal if it's only client-side or only server-side), etc. (A pre-existing unique id would be inelegant to add, but could be used if the spec otherwise requires its existence regardless.)
case 2: Working with serialized data, or data that will be displayed to the user. Like using a date as a string "1999-12-30" rather than a Date object (which can cause timezone bugs or added serialization complexity if not careful). Or you know what you're doing.
This is maybe fine. Be careful that there are no dot strings "." in your sanitized input fragments.
If you find yourself using this answer all the time and converting back and forth between string and array, you may be in the bad case, and should consider an alternative.
Here's an elegant one-liner that's 10x shorter than the other solutions:
function index(obj,i) {return obj[i]}
'a.b.etc'.split('.').reduce(index, obj)
[edit] Or in ECMAScript 6:
'a.b.etc'.split('.').reduce((o,i)=> o[i], obj)
(Not that I think eval always bad like others suggest it is (though it usually is), nevertheless those people will be pleased that this method doesn't use eval. The above will find obj.a.b.etc given obj and the string "a.b.etc".)
In response to those who still are afraid of using reduce despite it being in the ECMA-262 standard (5th edition), here is a two-line recursive implementation:
function multiIndex(obj,is) { // obj,['1','2','3'] -> ((obj['1'])['2'])['3']
return is.length ? multiIndex(obj[is[0]],is.slice(1)) : obj
}
function pathIndex(obj,is) { // obj,'1.2.3' -> multiIndex(obj,['1','2','3'])
return multiIndex(obj,is.split('.'))
}
pathIndex('a.b.etc')
Depending on the optimizations the JS compiler is doing, you may want to make sure any nested functions are not re-defined on every call via the usual methods (placing them in a closure, object, or global namespace).
edit:
To answer an interesting question in the comments:
how would you turn this into a setter as well? Not only returning the values by path, but also setting them if a new value is sent into the function? – Swader Jun 28 at 21:42
(sidenote: sadly can't return an object with a Setter, as that would violate the calling convention; commenter seems to instead be referring to a general setter-style function with side-effects like index(obj,"a.b.etc", value) doing obj.a.b.etc = value.)
The reduce style is not really suitable to that, but we can modify the recursive implementation:
function index(obj,is, value) {
if (typeof is == 'string')
return index(obj,is.split('.'), value);
else if (is.length==1 && value!==undefined)
return obj[is[0]] = value;
else if (is.length==0)
return obj;
else
return index(obj[is[0]],is.slice(1), value);
}
Demo:
> obj = {a:{b:{etc:5}}}
> index(obj,'a.b.etc')
5
> index(obj,['a','b','etc']) #works with both strings and lists
5
> index(obj,'a.b.etc', 123) #setter-mode - third argument (possibly poor form)
123
> index(obj,'a.b.etc')
123
...though personally I'd recommend making a separate function setIndex(...). I would like to end on a side-note that the original poser of the question could (should?) be working with arrays of indices (which they can get from .split), rather than strings; though there's usually nothing wrong with a convenience function.
A commenter asked:
what about arrays? something like "a.b[4].c.d[1][2][3]" ? –AlexS
Javascript is a very weird language; in general objects can only have strings as their property keys, so for example if x was a generic object like x={}, then x[1] would become x["1"]... you read that right... yup...
Javascript Arrays (which are themselves instances of Object) specifically encourage integer keys, even though you could do something like x=[]; x["puppy"]=5;.
But in general (and there are exceptions), x["somestring"]===x.somestring (when it's allowed; you can't do x.123).
(Keep in mind that whatever JS compiler you're using might choose, maybe, to compile these down to saner representations if it can prove it would not violate the spec.)
So the answer to your question would depend on whether you're assuming those objects only accept integers (due to a restriction in your problem domain), or not. Let's assume not. Then a valid expression is a concatenation of a base identifier plus some .identifiers plus some ["stringindex"]s.
Let us ignore for a moment that we can of course do other things legitimately in the grammar like identifier[0xFA7C25DD].asdf[f(4)?.[5]+k][false][null][undefined][NaN]; integers are not (that) 'special'.
Commenter's statement would then be equivalent to a["b"][4]["c"]["d"][1][2][3], though we should probably also support a.b["c\"validjsstringliteral"][3]. You'd have to check the ecmascript grammar section on string literals to see how to parse a valid string literal. Technically you'd also want to check (unlike in my first answer) that a is a valid javascript identifier.
A simple answer to your question though, if your strings don't contain commas or brackets, would be just be to match length 1+ sequences of characters not in the set , or [ or ]:
> "abc[4].c.def[1][2][\"gh\"]".match(/[^\]\[.]+/g)
// ^^^ ^ ^ ^^^ ^ ^ ^^^^^
["abc", "4", "c", "def", "1", "2", ""gh""]
If your strings don't contain escape characters or " characters, and because IdentifierNames are a sublanguage of StringLiterals (I think???) you could first convert your dots to []:
> var R=[], demoString="abc[4].c.def[1][2][\"gh\"]";
> for(var match,matcher=/^([^\.\[]+)|\.([^\.\[]+)|\["([^"]+)"\]|\[(\d+)\]/g;
match=matcher.exec(demoString); ) {
R.push(Array.from(match).slice(1).filter(x=> x!==undefined)[0]);
// extremely bad code because js regexes are weird, don't use this
}
> R
["abc", "4", "c", "def", "1", "2", "gh"]
Of course, always be careful and never trust your data. Some bad ways to do this that might work for some use cases also include:
// hackish/wrongish; preprocess your string into "a.b.4.c.d.1.2.3", e.g.:
> yourstring.replace(/]/g,"").replace(/\[/g,".").split(".")
"a.b.4.c.d.1.2.3" //use code from before
Special 2018 edit:
Let's go full-circle and do the most inefficient, horribly-overmetaprogrammed solution we can come up with... in the interest of syntactical purityhamfistery. With ES6 Proxy objects!... Let's also define some properties which (imho are fine and wonderful but) may break improperly-written libraries. You should perhaps be wary of using this if you care about performance, sanity (yours or others'), your job, etc.
// [1,2,3][-1]==3 (or just use .slice(-1)[0])
if (![1][-1])
Object.defineProperty(Array.prototype, -1, {get() {return this[this.length-1]}}); //credit to caub
// WARNING: THIS XTREME™ RADICAL METHOD IS VERY INEFFICIENT,
// ESPECIALLY IF INDEXING INTO MULTIPLE OBJECTS,
// because you are constantly creating wrapper objects on-the-fly and,
// even worse, going through Proxy i.e. runtime ~reflection, which prevents
// compiler optimization
// Proxy handler to override obj[*]/obj.* and obj[*]=...
var hyperIndexProxyHandler = {
get: function(obj,key, proxy) {
return key.split('.').reduce((o,i)=> o[i], obj);
},
set: function(obj,key,value, proxy) {
var keys = key.split('.');
var beforeLast = keys.slice(0,-1).reduce((o,i)=> o[i], obj);
beforeLast[keys[-1]] = value;
},
has: function(obj,key) {
//etc
}
};
function hyperIndexOf(target) {
return new Proxy(target, hyperIndexProxyHandler);
}
Demo:
var obj = {a:{b:{c:1, d:2}}};
console.log("obj is:", JSON.stringify(obj));
var objHyper = hyperIndexOf(obj);
console.log("(proxy override get) objHyper['a.b.c'] is:", objHyper['a.b.c']);
objHyper['a.b.c'] = 3;
console.log("(proxy override set) objHyper['a.b.c']=3, now obj is:", JSON.stringify(obj));
console.log("(behind the scenes) objHyper is:", objHyper);
if (!({}).H)
Object.defineProperties(Object.prototype, {
H: {
get: function() {
return hyperIndexOf(this); // TODO:cache as a non-enumerable property for efficiency?
}
}
});
console.log("(shortcut) obj.H['a.b.c']=4");
obj.H['a.b.c'] = 4;
console.log("(shortcut) obj.H['a.b.c'] is obj['a']['b']['c'] is", obj.H['a.b.c']);
Output:
obj is: {"a":{"b":{"c":1,"d":2}}}
(proxy override get) objHyper['a.b.c'] is: 1
(proxy override set) objHyper['a.b.c']=3, now obj is: {"a":{"b":{"c":3,"d":2}}}
(behind the scenes) objHyper is: Proxy {a: {…}}
(shortcut) obj.H['a.b.c']=4
(shortcut) obj.H['a.b.c'] is obj['a']['b']['c'] is: 4
inefficient idea: You can modify the above to dispatch based on the input argument; either use the .match(/[^\]\[.]+/g) method to support obj['keys'].like[3]['this'], or if instanceof Array, then just accept an Array as input like keys = ['a','b','c']; obj.H[keys].
Per suggestion that maybe you want to handle undefined indices in a 'softer' NaN-style manner (e.g. index({a:{b:{c:...}}}, 'a.x.c') return undefined rather than uncaught TypeError)...:
This makes sense from the perspective of "we should return undefined rather than throw an error" in the 1-dimensional index situation ({})['e.g.']==undefined, so "we should return undefined rather than throw an error" in the N-dimensional situation.
This does not make sense from the perspective that we are doing x['a']['x']['c'], which would fail with a TypeError in the above example.
That said, you'd make this work by replacing your reducing function with either:
(o,i)=> o===undefined?undefined:o[i], or
(o,i)=> (o||{})[i].
(You can make this more efficient by using a for loop and breaking/returning whenever the subresult you'd next index into is undefined, or using a try-catch if you expect such failures to be sufficiently rare.)

If you can use Lodash, there is a function, which does exactly that:
_.get(object, path, [defaultValue])
var val = _.get(obj, "a.b");

You could use lodash.get
After installing (npm i lodash.get), use it like this:
const get = require('lodash.get');
const myObj = {
user: {
firstName: 'Stacky',
lastName: 'Overflowy',
list: ['zero', 'one', 'two']
},
id: 123
};
console.log(get(myObj, 'user.firstName')); // outputs Stacky
console.log(get(myObj, 'id')); // outputs 123
console.log(get(myObj, 'user.list[1]')); // outputs one
// You can also update values
get(myObj, 'user').firstName = 'John';

A little more involved example with recursion.
function recompose(obj, string) {
var parts = string.split('.');
var newObj = obj[parts[0]];
if (parts[1]) {
parts.splice(0, 1);
var newString = parts.join('.');
return recompose(newObj, newString);
}
return newObj;
}
var obj = { a: { b: '1', c: '2', d:{a:{b:'blah'}}}};
console.log(recompose(obj, 'a.d.a.b')); //blah

2021
You don't need to pull in another dependency every time you wish for new capabilities in your program. Modern JS is very capable and the optional-chaining operator ?. is now widely supported and makes this kind of task easy as heck.
With a single line of code we can write get that takes an input object, t and string path. It works for object and arrays of any nesting level -
const get = (t, path) =>
path.split(".").reduce((r, k) => r?.[k], t)
const mydata =
{ a: { b: [ 0, { c: { d: [ "hello", "world" ] } } ] } }
console.log(get(mydata, "a.b.1.c.d.0"))
console.log(get(mydata, "a.b.1.c.d.1"))
console.log(get(mydata, "a.b.x.y.z"))
"hello"
"world"
undefined

I suggest to split the path and iterate it and reduce the object you have. This proposal works with a default value for missing properties.
const getValue = (object, keys) => keys.split('.').reduce((o, k) => (o || {})[k], object);
console.log(getValue({ a: { b: '1', c: '2' } }, 'a.b'));
console.log(getValue({ a: { b: '1', c: '2' } }, 'foo.bar.baz'));

Many years since the original post.
Now there is a great library called 'object-path'.
https://github.com/mariocasciaro/object-path
Available on NPM and BOWER
https://www.npmjs.com/package/object-path
It's as easy as:
objectPath.get(obj, "a.c.1"); //returns "f"
objectPath.set(obj, "a.j.0.f", "m");
And works for deeply nested properties and arrays.

If you expect to dereference the same path many times, building a function for each dot notation path actually has the best performance by far (expanding on the perf tests James Wilkins linked to in comments above).
var path = 'a.b.x';
var getter = new Function("obj", "return obj." + path + ";");
getter(obj);
Using the Function constructor has some of the same drawbacks as eval() in terms of security and worst-case performance, but IMO it's a badly underused tool for cases where you need a combination of extreme dynamism and high performance. I use this methodology to build array filter functions and call them inside an AngularJS digest loop. My profiles consistently show the array.filter() step taking less than 1ms to dereference and filter about 2000 complex objects, using dynamically-defined paths 3-4 levels deep.
A similar methodology could be used to create setter functions, of course:
var setter = new Function("obj", "newval", "obj." + path + " = newval;");
setter(obj, "some new val");

Other proposals are a little cryptic, so I thought I'd contribute:
Object.prop = function(obj, prop, val){
var props = prop.split('.')
, final = props.pop(), p
while(p = props.shift()){
if (typeof obj[p] === 'undefined')
return undefined;
obj = obj[p]
}
return val ? (obj[final] = val) : obj[final]
}
var obj = { a: { b: '1', c: '2' } }
// get
console.log(Object.prop(obj, 'a.c')) // -> 2
// set
Object.prop(obj, 'a.c', function(){})
console.log(obj) // -> { a: { b: '1', c: [Function] } }

var a = { b: { c: 9 } };
function value(layer, path, value) {
var i = 0,
path = path.split('.');
for (; i < path.length; i++)
if (value != null && i + 1 === path.length)
layer[path[i]] = value;
layer = layer[path[i]];
return layer;
};
value(a, 'b.c'); // 9
value(a, 'b.c', 4);
value(a, 'b.c'); // 4
This is a lot of code when compared to the much simpler eval way of doing it, but like Simon Willison says, you should never use eval.
Also, JSFiddle.

You can use the library available at npm, which simplifies this process. https://www.npmjs.com/package/dot-object
var dot = require('dot-object');
var obj = {
some: {
nested: {
value: 'Hi there!'
}
}
};
var val = dot.pick('some.nested.value', obj);
console.log(val);
// Result: Hi there!

Note if you're already using Lodash you can use the property or get functions:
var obj = { a: { b: '1', c: '2' } };
_.property('a.b')(obj); // => 1
_.get(obj, 'a.b'); // => 1
Underscore.js also has a property function, but it doesn't support dot notation.

I have extended the elegant answer by ninjagecko so that the function handles both dotted and/or array style references, and so that an empty string causes the parent object to be returned.
Here you go:
string_to_ref = function (object, reference) {
function arr_deref(o, ref, i) { return !ref ? o : (o[ref.slice(0, i ? -1 : ref.length)]) }
function dot_deref(o, ref) { return ref.split('[').reduce(arr_deref, o); }
return !reference ? object : reference.split('.').reduce(dot_deref, object);
};
See my working jsFiddle example here: http://jsfiddle.net/sc0ttyd/q7zyd/

You can obtain value of an object member by dot notation with a single line of code:
new Function('_', 'return _.' + path)(obj);
In you case:
var obj = { a: { b: '1', c: '2' } }
var val = new Function('_', 'return _.a.b')(obj);
To make it simple you may write a function like this:
function objGet(obj, path){
return new Function('_', 'return _.' + path)(obj);
}
Explanation:
The Function constructor creates a new Function object. In JavaScript every function is actually a Function object. Syntax to create a function explicitly with Function constructor is:
new Function ([arg1[, arg2[, ...argN]],] functionBody)
where arguments(arg1 to argN) must be a string that corresponds to a valid javaScript identifier and functionBody is a string containing the javaScript statements comprising the function definition.
In our case we take the advantage of string function body to retrieve object member with dot notation.
Hope it helps.

var find = function(root, path) {
var segments = path.split('.'),
cursor = root,
target;
for (var i = 0; i < segments.length; ++i) {
target = cursor[segments[i]];
if (typeof target == "undefined") return void 0;
cursor = target;
}
return cursor;
};
var obj = { a: { b: '1', c: '2' } }
find(obj, "a.b"); // 1
var set = function (root, path, value) {
var segments = path.split('.'),
cursor = root,
target;
for (var i = 0; i < segments.length - 1; ++i) {
cursor = cursor[segments[i]] || { };
}
cursor[segments[segments.length - 1]] = value;
};
set(obj, "a.k", function () { console.log("hello world"); });
find(obj, "a.k")(); // hello world

Use this function:
function dotToObject(data) {
function index(parent, key, value) {
const [mainKey, ...children] = key.split(".");
parent[mainKey] = parent[mainKey] || {};
if (children.length === 1) {
parent[mainKey][children[0]] = value;
} else {
index(parent[mainKey], children.join("."), value);
}
}
const result = Object.entries(data).reduce((acc, [key, value]) => {
if (key.includes(".")) {
index(acc, key, value);
} else {
acc[key] = value;
}
return acc;
}, {});
return result;
}
module.exports = { dotToObject };
Ex:
const user = {
id: 1,
name: 'My name',
'address.zipCode': '123',
'address.name': 'Some name',
'address.something.id': 1,
}
const mappedUser = dotToObject(user)
console.log(JSON.stringify(mappedUser, null, 2))
Output:
{
"id": 1,
"name": "My name",
"address": {
"zipCode": "123",
"name": "Some name",
"something": {
"id": 1
}
}
}

using Array Reduce function will get/set based on path provided.
I tested it with a.b.c and a.b.2.c {a:{b:[0,1,{c:7}]}} and its works for both getting key or mutating object to set value
function setOrGet(obj, path=[], newValue){
const l = typeof path === 'string' ? path.split('.') : path;
return l.reduce((carry,item, idx)=>{
const leaf = carry[item];
// is this last item in path ? cool lets set/get value
if( l.length-idx===1) {
// mutate object if newValue is set;
carry[item] = newValue===undefined ? leaf : newValue;
// return value if its a get/object if it was a set
return newValue===undefined ? leaf : obj ;
}
carry[item] = leaf || {}; // mutate if key not an object;
return carry[item]; // return object ref: to continue reduction;
}, obj)
}
console.log(
setOrGet({a: {b:1}},'a.b') === 1 ||
'Test Case: Direct read failed'
)
console.log(
setOrGet({a: {b:1}},'a.c',22).a.c===22 ||
'Test Case: Direct set failed'
)
console.log(
setOrGet({a: {b:[1,2]}},'a.b.1',22).a.b[1]===22 ||
'Test Case: Direct set on array failed'
)
console.log(
setOrGet({a: {b:{c: {e:1} }}},'a.b.c.e',22).a.b.c. e===22 ||
'Test Case: deep get failed'
)
// failed !. Thats your homework :)
console.log(
setOrGet({a: {b:{c: {e:[1,2,3,4,5]} }}},'a.b.c.e.3 ',22)
)
my personal recommendation.
do not use such a thing unless there is no other way!
i saw many examples people use it for translations for example from json; so you see function like locale('app.homepage.welcome') . this is just bad. if you already have data in an object/json; and you know path.. then just use it directly example locale().app.homepage.welcome by changing you function to return object you get typesafe, with autocomplete, less prone to typo's ..

I copied the following from Ricardo Tomasi's answer and modified to also create sub-objects that don't yet exist as necessary. It's a little less efficient (more ifs and creating of empty objects), but should be pretty good.
Also, it'll allow us to do Object.prop(obj, 'a.b', false) where we couldn't before. Unfortunately, it still won't let us assign undefined...Not sure how to go about that one yet.
/**
* Object.prop()
*
* Allows dot-notation access to object properties for both getting and setting.
*
* #param {Object} obj The object we're getting from or setting
* #param {string} prop The dot-notated string defining the property location
* #param {mixed} val For setting only; the value to set
*/
Object.prop = function(obj, prop, val){
var props = prop.split('.'),
final = props.pop(),
p;
for (var i = 0; i < props.length; i++) {
p = props[i];
if (typeof obj[p] === 'undefined') {
// If we're setting
if (typeof val !== 'undefined') {
// If we're not at the end of the props, keep adding new empty objects
if (i != props.length)
obj[p] = {};
}
else
return undefined;
}
obj = obj[p]
}
return typeof val !== "undefined" ? (obj[final] = val) : obj[final]
}

Few years later, I found this that handles scope and array. e.g. a['b']["c"].d.etc
function getScopedObj(scope, str) {
let obj=scope, arr;
try {
arr = str.split(/[\[\]\.]/) // split by [,],.
.filter(el => el) // filter out empty one
.map(el => el.replace(/^['"]+|['"]+$/g, '')); // remove string quotation
arr.forEach(el => obj = obj[el])
} catch(e) {
obj = undefined;
}
return obj;
}
window.a = {b: {c: {d: {etc: 'success'}}}}
getScopedObj(window, `a.b.c.d.etc`) // success
getScopedObj(window, `a['b']["c"].d.etc`) // success
getScopedObj(window, `a['INVALID']["c"].d.etc`) // undefined

If you wish to convert any object that contains dot notation keys into an arrayed version of those keys you can use this.
This will convert something like
{
name: 'Andy',
brothers.0: 'Bob'
brothers.1: 'Steve'
brothers.2: 'Jack'
sisters.0: 'Sally'
}
to
{
name: 'Andy',
brothers: ['Bob', 'Steve', 'Jack']
sisters: ['Sally']
}
convertDotNotationToArray(objectWithDotNotation) {
Object.entries(objectWithDotNotation).forEach(([key, val]) => {
// Is the key of dot notation
if (key.includes('.')) {
const [name, index] = key.split('.');
// If you have not created an array version, create one
if (!objectWithDotNotation[name]) {
objectWithDotNotation[name] = new Array();
}
// Save the value in the newly created array at the specific index
objectWithDotNotation[name][index] = val;
// Delete the current dot notation key val
delete objectWithDotNotation[key];
}
});
}

If you want to convert a string dot notation into an object, I've made a handy little helper than can turn a string like a.b.c.d with a value of e with dotPathToObject("a.b.c.d", "value") returning this:
{
"a": {
"b": {
"c": {
"d": "value"
}
}
}
}
https://gist.github.com/ahallora/9731d73efb15bd3d3db647efa3389c12

Solution:
function deepFind(key, data){
return key.split('.').reduce((ob,i)=> ob?.[i], data)
}
Usage:
const obj = {
company: "Pet Shop",
person: {
name: "John"
},
animal: {
name: "Lucky"
}
}
const company = deepFind("company", obj)
const personName = deepFind("person.name", obj)
const animalName = deepFind("animal.name", obj)

Here is my implementation
Implementation 1
Object.prototype.access = function() {
var ele = this[arguments[0]];
if(arguments.length === 1) return ele;
return ele.access.apply(ele, [].slice.call(arguments, 1));
}
Implementation 2 (using array reduce instead of slice)
Object.prototype.access = function() {
var self = this;
return [].reduce.call(arguments,function(prev,cur) {
return prev[cur];
}, self);
}
Examples:
var myobj = {'a':{'b':{'c':{'d':'abcd','e':[11,22,33]}}}};
myobj.access('a','b','c'); // returns: {'d':'abcd', e:[0,1,2,3]}
myobj.a.b.access('c','d'); // returns: 'abcd'
myobj.access('a','b','c','e',0); // returns: 11
it can also handle objects inside arrays as for
var myobj2 = {'a': {'b':[{'c':'ab0c'},{'d':'ab1d'}]}}
myobj2.access('a','b','1','d'); // returns: 'ab1d'

I used this code in my project
const getValue = (obj, arrPath) => (
arrPath.reduce((x, y) => {
if (y in x) return x[y]
return {}
}, obj)
)
Usage:
const obj = { id: { user: { local: 104 } } }
const path = [ 'id', 'user', 'local' ]
getValue(obj, path) // return 104

Using object-scan seems a bit overkill, but you can simply do
// const objectScan = require('object-scan');
const get = (obj, p) => objectScan([p], { abort: true, rtn: 'value' })(obj);
const obj = { a: { b: '1', c: '2' } };
console.log(get(obj, 'a.b'));
// => 1
console.log(get(obj, '*.c'));
// => 2
.as-console-wrapper {max-height: 100% !important; top: 0}
<script src="https://bundle.run/object-scan#13.7.1"></script>
Disclaimer: I'm the author of object-scan
There are a lot more advanced examples in the readme.

This is one of those cases, where you ask 10 developers and you get 10 answers.
Below is my [simplified] solution for OP, using dynamic programming.
The idea is that you would pass an existing DTO object that you wish to UPDATE. This makes the method most useful in the case where you have a form with several input elements having name attributes set with dot (fluent) syntax.
Example use:
<input type="text" name="person.contact.firstName" />
Code snippet:
const setFluently = (obj, path, value) => {
if (typeof path === "string") {
return setFluently(obj, path.split("."), value);
}
if (path.length <= 1) {
obj[path[0]] = value;
return obj;
}
const key = path[0];
obj[key] = setFluently(obj[key] ? obj[key] : {}, path.slice(1), value);
return obj;
};
const origObj = {
a: {
b: "1",
c: "2"
}
};
setFluently(origObj, "a.b", "3");
setFluently(origObj, "a.c", "4");
console.log(JSON.stringify(origObj, null, 3));

function at(obj, path, val = undefined) {
// If path is an Array,
if (Array.isArray(path)) {
// it returns the mapped array for each result of the path
return path.map((path) => at(obj, path, val));
}
// Uniting several RegExps into one
const rx = new RegExp(
[
/(?:^(?:\.\s*)?([_a-zA-Z][_a-zA-Z0-9]*))/,
/(?:^\[\s*(\d+)\s*\])/,
/(?:^\[\s*'([^']*(?:\\'[^']*)*)'\s*\])/,
/(?:^\[\s*"([^"]*(?:\\"[^"]*)*)"\s*\])/,
/(?:^\[\s*`([^`]*(?:\\`[^`]*)*)`\s*\])/,
]
.map((r) => r.source)
.join("|")
);
let rm;
while (rm = rx.exec(path.trim())) {
// Matched resource
let [rf, rp] = rm.filter(Boolean);
// If no one matches found,
if (!rm[1] && !rm[2]) {
// it will replace escape-chars
rp = rp.replace(/\\(.)/g, "$1");
}
// If the new value is set,
if ("undefined" != typeof val && path.length == rf.length) {
// assign a value to the object property and return it
return (obj[rp] = val);
}
// Going one step deeper
obj = obj[rp];
// Removing a step from the path
path = path.substr(rf.length).trim();
}
if (path) {
throw new SyntaxError();
}
return obj;
}
// Test object schema
let o = { a: { b: [ [ { c: { d: { '"e"': { f: { g: "xxx" } } } } } ] ] } };
// Print source object
console.log(JSON.stringify(o));
// Set value
console.log(at(o, '.a["b"][0][0].c[`d`]["\\"e\\""][\'f\']["g"]', "zzz"));
// Get value
console.log(at(o, '.a["b"][0][0].c[`d`]["\\"e\\""][\'f\']["g"]'));
// Print result object
console.log(JSON.stringify(o));

Here is my code without using eval. It’s easy to understand too.
function value(obj, props) {
if (!props)
return obj;
var propsArr = props.split('.');
var prop = propsArr.splice(0, 1);
return value(obj[prop], propsArr.join('.'));
}
var obj = { a: { b: '1', c: '2', d:{a:{b:'blah'}}}};
console.log(value(obj, 'a.d.a.b')); // Returns blah

Yes, extending base prototypes is not usually good idea but, if you keep all extensions in one place, they might be useful.
So, here is my way to do this.
Object.defineProperty(Object.prototype, "getNestedProperty", {
value : function (propertyName) {
var result = this;
var arr = propertyName.split(".");
while (arr.length && result) {
result = result[arr.shift()];
}
return result;
},
enumerable: false
});
Now you will be able to get nested property everywhere without importing module with function or copy/pasting function.
Example:
{a:{b:11}}.getNestedProperty('a.b'); // Returns 11
The Next.js extension broke Mongoose in my project. Also I've read that it might break jQuery. So, never do it in the Next.js way:
Object.prototype.getNestedProperty = function (propertyName) {
var result = this;
var arr = propertyName.split(".");
while (arr.length && result) {
result = result[arr.shift()];
}
return result;
};

This is my extended solution proposed by ninjagecko.
For me, simple string notation was not enough, so the below version supports things like:
index(obj, 'data.accounts[0].address[0].postcode');
 
/**
* Get object by index
* #supported
* - arrays supported
* - array indexes supported
* #not-supported
* - multiple arrays
* #issues:
* index(myAccount, 'accounts[0].address[0].id') - works fine
* index(myAccount, 'accounts[].address[0].id') - doesnt work
* #Example:
* index(obj, 'data.accounts[].id') => returns array of id's
* index(obj, 'data.accounts[0].id') => returns id of 0 element from array
* index(obj, 'data.accounts[0].addresses.list[0].id') => error
* #param obj
* #param path
* #returns {any}
*/
var index = function(obj, path, isArray?, arrIndex?){
// is an array
if(typeof isArray === 'undefined') isArray = false;
// array index,
// if null, will take all indexes
if(typeof arrIndex === 'undefined') arrIndex = null;
var _arrIndex = null;
var reduceArrayTag = function(i, subArrIndex){
return i.replace(/(\[)([\d]{0,})(\])/, (i) => {
var tmp = i.match(/(\[)([\d]{0,})(\])/);
isArray = true;
if(subArrIndex){
_arrIndex = (tmp[2] !== '') ? tmp[2] : null;
}else{
arrIndex = (tmp[2] !== '') ? tmp[2] : null;
}
return '';
});
}
function byIndex(obj, i) {
// if is an array
if(isArray){
isArray = false;
i = reduceArrayTag(i, true);
// if array index is null,
// return an array of with values from every index
if(!arrIndex){
var arrValues = [];
_.forEach(obj, (el) => {
arrValues.push(index(el, i, isArray, arrIndex));
})
return arrValues;
}
// if array index is specified
var value = obj[arrIndex][i];
if(isArray){
arrIndex = _arrIndex;
}else{
arrIndex = null;
}
return value;
}else{
// remove [] from notation,
// if [] has been removed, check the index of array
i = reduceArrayTag(i, false);
return obj[i]
}
}
// reduce with the byIndex method
return path.split('.').reduce(byIndex, obj)
}

Length of a JavaScript object

I have a JavaScript object. Is there a built-in or accepted best practice way to get the length of this object?
const myObject = new Object();
myObject["firstname"] = "Gareth";
myObject["lastname"] = "Simpson";
myObject["age"] = 21;

Updated answer
Here's an update as of 2016 and widespread deployment of ES5 and beyond. For IE9+ and all other modern ES5+ capable browsers, you can use Object.keys() so the above code just becomes:
var size = Object.keys(myObj).length;
This doesn't have to modify any existing prototype since Object.keys() is now built-in.
Edit: Objects can have symbolic properties that can not be returned via Object.key method. So the answer would be incomplete without mentioning them.
Symbol type was added to the language to create unique identifiers for object properties. The main benefit of the Symbol type is the prevention of overwrites.
Object.keys or Object.getOwnPropertyNames does not work for symbolic properties. To return them you need to use Object.getOwnPropertySymbols.
var person = {
[Symbol('name')]: 'John Doe',
[Symbol('age')]: 33,
"occupation": "Programmer"
};
const propOwn = Object.getOwnPropertyNames(person);
console.log(propOwn.length); // 1
let propSymb = Object.getOwnPropertySymbols(person);
console.log(propSymb.length); // 2
Older answer
The most robust answer (i.e. that captures the intent of what you're trying to do while causing the fewest bugs) would be:
Object.size = function(obj) {
var size = 0,
key;
for (key in obj) {
if (obj.hasOwnProperty(key)) size++;
}
return size;
};
// Get the size of an object
const myObj = {}
var size = Object.size(myObj);
There's a sort of convention in JavaScript that you don't add things to Object.prototype, because it can break enumerations in various libraries. Adding methods to Object is usually safe, though.

If you know you don't have to worry about hasOwnProperty checks, you can use the Object.keys() method in this way:
Object.keys(myArray).length

Updated: If you're using Underscore.js (recommended, it's lightweight!), then you can just do
_.size({one : 1, two : 2, three : 3});
=> 3
If not, and you don't want to mess around with Object properties for whatever reason, and are already using jQuery, a plugin is equally accessible:
$.assocArraySize = function(obj) {
// http://stackoverflow.com/a/6700/11236
var size = 0, key;
for (key in obj) {
if (obj.hasOwnProperty(key)) size++;
}
return size;
};

Here's the most cross-browser solution.
This is better than the accepted answer because it uses native Object.keys if exists.
Thus, it is the fastest for all modern browsers.
if (!Object.keys) {
Object.keys = function (obj) {
var arr = [],
key;
for (key in obj) {
if (obj.hasOwnProperty(key)) {
arr.push(key);
}
}
return arr;
};
}
Object.keys(obj).length;

Simply use this to get the length:
Object.keys(myObject).length

I'm not a JavaScript expert, but it looks like you would have to loop through the elements and count them since Object doesn't have a length method:
var element_count = 0;
for (e in myArray) { if (myArray.hasOwnProperty(e)) element_count++; }
#palmsey: In fairness to the OP, the JavaScript documentation actually explicitly refer to using variables of type Object in this manner as "associative arrays".

This method gets all your object's property names in an array, so you can get the length of that array which is equal to your object's keys' length.
Object.getOwnPropertyNames({"hi":"Hi","msg":"Message"}).length; // => 2

To not mess with the prototype or other code, you could build and extend your own object:
function Hash(){
var length=0;
this.add = function(key, val){
if(this[key] == undefined)
{
length++;
}
this[key]=val;
};
this.length = function(){
return length;
};
}
myArray = new Hash();
myArray.add("lastname", "Simpson");
myArray.add("age", 21);
alert(myArray.length()); // will alert 2
If you always use the add method, the length property will be correct. If you're worried that you or others forget about using it, you could add the property counter which the others have posted to the length method, too.
Of course, you could always overwrite the methods. But even if you do, your code would probably fail noticeably, making it easy to debug. ;)

We can find the length of Object by using:
const myObject = {};
console.log(Object.values(myObject).length);

Here's how and don't forget to check that the property is not on the prototype chain:
var element_count = 0;
for(var e in myArray)
if(myArray.hasOwnProperty(e))
element_count++;

Here is a completely different solution that will only work in more modern browsers (Internet Explorer 9+, Chrome, Firefox 4+, Opera 11.60+, and Safari 5.1+)
See this jsFiddle.
Setup your associative array class
/**
* #constructor
*/
AssociativeArray = function () {};
// Make the length property work
Object.defineProperty(AssociativeArray.prototype, "length", {
get: function () {
var count = 0;
for (var key in this) {
if (this.hasOwnProperty(key))
count++;
}
return count;
}
});
Now you can use this code as follows...
var a1 = new AssociativeArray();
a1["prop1"] = "test";
a1["prop2"] = 1234;
a1["prop3"] = "something else";
alert("Length of array is " + a1.length);

If you need an associative data structure that exposes its size, better use a map instead of an object.
const myMap = new Map();
myMap.set("firstname", "Gareth");
myMap.set("lastname", "Simpson");
myMap.set("age", 21);
console.log(myMap.size); // 3

Use Object.keys(myObject).length to get the length of object/array
var myObject = new Object();
myObject["firstname"] = "Gareth";
myObject["lastname"] = "Simpson";
myObject["age"] = 21;
console.log(Object.keys(myObject).length); //3

Use:
var myArray = new Object();
myArray["firstname"] = "Gareth";
myArray["lastname"] = "Simpson";
myArray["age"] = 21;
obj = Object.keys(myArray).length;
console.log(obj)

<script>
myObj = {"key1" : "Hello", "key2" : "Goodbye"};
var size = Object.keys(myObj).length;
console.log(size);
</script>
<p id="myObj">The number of <b>keys</b> in <b>myObj</b> are: <script>document.write(size)</script></p>
This works for me:
var size = Object.keys(myObj).length;

For some cases it is better to just store the size in a separate variable. Especially, if you're adding to the array by one element in one place and can easily increment the size. It would obviously work much faster if you need to check the size often.

The simplest way is like this:
Object.keys(myobject).length
Where myobject is the object of what you want the length of.

#palmsey: In fairness to the OP, the JavaScript documentation actually explicitly refer to using variables of type Object in this manner as "associative arrays".
And in fairness to #palmsey he was quite correct. They aren't associative arrays; they're definitely objects :) - doing the job of an associative array. But as regards to the wider point, you definitely seem to have the right of it according to this rather fine article I found:
JavaScript “Associative Arrays” Considered Harmful
But according to all this, the accepted answer itself is bad practice?
Specify a prototype size() function for Object
If anything else has been added to Object .prototype, then the suggested code will fail:
<script type="text/javascript">
Object.prototype.size = function () {
var len = this.length ? --this.length : -1;
for (var k in this)
len++;
return len;
}
Object.prototype.size2 = function () {
var len = this.length ? --this.length : -1;
for (var k in this)
len++;
return len;
}
var myArray = new Object();
myArray["firstname"] = "Gareth";
myArray["lastname"] = "Simpson";
myArray["age"] = 21;
alert("age is " + myArray["age"]);
alert("length is " + myArray.size());
</script>
I don't think that answer should be the accepted one as it can't be trusted to work if you have any other code running in the same execution context. To do it in a robust fashion, surely you would need to define the size method within myArray and check for the type of the members as you iterate through them.

If we have the hash
hash = {"a" : "b", "c": "d"};
we can get the length using the length of the keys which is the length of the hash:
keys(hash).length

Using the Object.entries method to get length is one way of achieving it
const objectLength = obj => Object.entries(obj).length;
const person = {
id: 1,
name: 'John',
age: 30
}
const car = {
type: 2,
color: 'red',
}
console.log(objectLength(person)); // 3
console.log(objectLength(car)); // 2

var myObject = new Object();
myObject["firstname"] = "Gareth";
myObject["lastname"] = "Simpson";
myObject["age"] = 21;
Object.values(myObject).length
Object.entries(myObject).length
Object.keys(myObject).length

What about something like this --
function keyValuePairs() {
this.length = 0;
function add(key, value) { this[key] = value; this.length++; }
function remove(key) { if (this.hasOwnProperty(key)) { delete this[key]; this.length--; }}
}

If you are using AngularJS 1.x you can do things the AngularJS way by creating a filter and using the code from any of the other examples such as the following:
// Count the elements in an object
app.filter('lengthOfObject', function() {
return function( obj ) {
var size = 0, key;
for (key in obj) {
if (obj.hasOwnProperty(key)) size++;
}
return size;
}
})
Usage
In your controller:
$scope.filterResult = $filter('lengthOfObject')($scope.object)
Or in your view:
<any ng-expression="object | lengthOfObject"></any>

const myObject = new Object();
myObject["firstname"] = "Gareth";
myObject["lastname"] = "Simpson";
myObject["age"] = 21;
console.log(Object.keys(myObject).length)
// o/p 3

A variation on some of the above is:
var objLength = function(obj){
var key,len=0;
for(key in obj){
len += Number( obj.hasOwnProperty(key) );
}
return len;
};
It is a bit more elegant way to integrate hasOwnProp.

If you don't care about supporting Internet Explorer 8 or lower, you can easily get the number of properties in an object by applying the following two steps:
Run either Object.keys() to get an array that contains the names of only those properties that are enumerable or Object.getOwnPropertyNames() if you want to also include the names of properties that are not enumerable.
Get the .length property of that array.
If you need to do this more than once, you could wrap this logic in a function:
function size(obj, enumerablesOnly) {
return enumerablesOnly === false ?
Object.getOwnPropertyNames(obj).length :
Object.keys(obj).length;
}
How to use this particular function:
var myObj = Object.create({}, {
getFoo: {},
setFoo: {}
});
myObj.Foo = 12;
var myArr = [1,2,5,4,8,15];
console.log(size(myObj)); // Output : 1
console.log(size(myObj, true)); // Output : 1
console.log(size(myObj, false)); // Output : 3
console.log(size(myArr)); // Output : 6
console.log(size(myArr, true)); // Output : 6
console.log(size(myArr, false)); // Output : 7
See also this Fiddle for a demo.

Here's a different version of James Cogan's answer. Instead of passing an argument, just prototype out the Object class and make the code cleaner.
Object.prototype.size = function () {
var size = 0,
key;
for (key in this) {
if (this.hasOwnProperty(key)) size++;
}
return size;
};
var x = {
one: 1,
two: 2,
three: 3
};
x.size() === 3;
jsfiddle example: http://jsfiddle.net/qar4j/1/

You can always do Object.getOwnPropertyNames(myObject).length to get the same result as [].length would give for normal array.

You can simply use Object.keys(obj).length on any object to get its length. Object.keys returns an array containing all of the object keys (properties) which can come in handy for finding the length of that object using the length of the corresponding array. You can even write a function for this. Let's get creative and write a method for it as well (along with a more convienient getter property):
function objLength(obj)
{
return Object.keys(obj).length;
}
console.log(objLength({a:1, b:"summit", c:"nonsense"}));
// Works perfectly fine
var obj = new Object();
obj['fish'] = 30;
obj['nullified content'] = null;
console.log(objLength(obj));
// It also works your way, which is creating it using the Object constructor
Object.prototype.getLength = function() {
return Object.keys(this).length;
}
console.log(obj.getLength());
// You can also write it as a method, which is more efficient as done so above
Object.defineProperty(Object.prototype, "length", {get:function(){
return Object.keys(this).length;
}});
console.log(obj.length);
// probably the most effictive approach is done so and demonstrated above which sets a getter property called "length" for objects which returns the equivalent value of getLength(this) or this.getLength()

A nice way to achieve this (Internet Explorer 9+ only) is to define a magic getter on the length property:
Object.defineProperty(Object.prototype, "length", {
get: function () {
return Object.keys(this).length;
}
});
And you can just use it like so:
var myObj = { 'key': 'value' };
myObj.length;
It would give 1.