way to check "value" of undefines [duplicate] - javascript

I'll explain by example:
Elvis Operator (?: )
The "Elvis operator" is a shortening
of Java's ternary operator. One
instance of where this is handy is for
returning a 'sensible default' value
if an expression resolves to false or
null. A simple example might look like
this:
def gender = user.male ? "male" : "female" //traditional ternary operator usage
def displayName = user.name ?: "Anonymous" //more compact Elvis operator
Safe Navigation Operator (?.)
The Safe Navigation operator is used
to avoid a NullPointerException.
Typically when you have a reference to
an object you might need to verify
that it is not null before accessing
methods or properties of the object.
To avoid this, the safe navigation
operator will simply return null
instead of throwing an exception, like
so:
def user = User.find( "admin" ) //this might be null if 'admin' does not exist
def streetName = user?.address?.street //streetName will be null if user or user.address is null - no NPE thrown

You can use the logical 'OR' operator in place of the Elvis operator:
For example displayname = user.name || "Anonymous" .
But Javascript currently doesn't have the other functionality. I'd recommend looking at CoffeeScript if you want an alternative syntax. It has some shorthand that is similar to what you are looking for.
For example The Existential Operator
zip = lottery.drawWinner?().address?.zipcode
Function shortcuts
()-> // equivalent to function(){}
Sexy function calling
func 'arg1','arg2' // equivalent to func('arg1','arg2')
There is also multiline comments and classes. Obviously you have to compile this to javascript or insert into the page as <script type='text/coffeescript>' but it adds a lot of functionality :) . Using <script type='text/coffeescript'> is really only intended for development and not production.

I think the following is equivalent to the safe navigation operator, although a bit longer:
var streetName = user && user.address && user.address.street;
streetName will then be either the value of user.address.street or undefined.
If you want it to default to something else you can combine with the above shortcut or to give:
var streetName = (user && user.address && user.address.street) || "Unknown Street";

2020 Update
JavaScript now has equivalents for both the Elvis Operator and the Safe Navigation Operator.
Safe Property Access
The optional chaining operator (?.) is currently a stage 4 ECMAScript proposal. You can use it today with Babel.
// `undefined` if either `a` or `b` are `null`/`undefined`. `a.b.c` otherwise.
const myVariable = a?.b?.c;
The logical AND operator (&&) is the "old", more-verbose way to handle this scenario.
const myVariable = a && a.b && a.b.c;
Providing a Default
The nullish coalescing operator (??) is currently a stage 4 ECMAScript proposal. You can use it today with Babel. It allows you to set a default value if the left-hand side of the operator is a nullary value (null/undefined).
const myVariable = a?.b?.c ?? 'Some other value';
// Evaluates to 'Some other value'
const myVariable2 = null ?? 'Some other value';
// Evaluates to ''
const myVariable3 = '' ?? 'Some other value';
The logical OR operator (||) is an alternative solution with slightly different behavior. It allows you to set a default value if the left-hand side of the operator is falsy. Note that the result of myVariable3 below differs from myVariable3 above.
const myVariable = a?.b?.c || 'Some other value';
// Evaluates to 'Some other value'
const myVariable2 = null || 'Some other value';
// Evaluates to 'Some other value'
const myVariable3 = '' || 'Some other value';

Javascript's logical OR operator is short-circuiting and can replace your "Elvis" operator:
var displayName = user.name || "Anonymous";
However, to my knowledge there's no equivalent to your ?. operator.

I've occasionally found the following idiom useful:
a?.b?.c
can be rewritten as:
((a||{}).b||{}).c
This takes advantage of the fact that getting unknown attributes on an object returns undefined, rather than throwing an exception as it does on null or undefined, so we replace null and undefined with an empty object before navigating.

i think lodash _.get() can help here, as in _.get(user, 'name'), and more complex tasks like _.get(o, 'a[0].b.c', 'default-value')

There is currently a draft spec:
https://github.com/tc39/proposal-optional-chaining
https://tc39.github.io/proposal-optional-chaining/
For now, though, I like to use lodash get(object, path [,defaultValue]) or dlv delve(obj, keypath)
Update (as of Dec 23, 2019):
optional chaining has moved to stage 4

For the former, you can use ||. The Javascript "logical or" operator, rather than simply returning canned true and false values, follows the rule of returning its left argument if it is true, and otherwise evaluating and returning its right argument. When you're only interested in the truth value it works out the same, but it also means that foo || bar || baz returns the leftmost one of foo, bar, or baz that contains a true value.
You won't find one that can distinguish false from null, though, and 0 and empty string are false values, so avoid using the value || default construct where value can legitimately be 0 or "".

Yes, there is! 🍾
Optional chaining is in stage 4 and this enables you to use the user?.address?.street formula.
If you can't wait the release, install #babel/plugin-proposal-optional-chaining and you can use it.
Here are my settings which works for me, or just read Nimmo's article.
// package.json
{
"name": "optional-chaining-test",
"version": "1.0.0",
"main": "index.js",
"devDependencies": {
"#babel/plugin-proposal-optional-chaining": "7.2.0",
"#babel/core": "7.2.0",
"#babel/preset-env": "^7.5.5"
}
...
}
// .babelrc
{
"presets": [
[
"#babel/preset-env",
{
"debug": true
}
]
],
"plugins": [
"#babel/plugin-proposal-optional-chaining"
]
}
// index.js
console.log(user?.address?.street); // it works

Here's a simple elvis operator equivalent:
function elvis(object, path) {
return path ? path.split('.').reduce(function (nestedObject, key) {
return nestedObject && nestedObject[key];
}, object) : object;
}
> var o = { a: { b: 2 }, c: 3 };
> elvis(o)
{ a: { b: 2 }, c: 3 }
> elvis(o, 'a');
{ b: 2 }
> elvis(o, 'a.b');
2
> elvis(o, 'x');
undefined

You can achieve roughly the same effect by saying:
var displayName = user.name || "Anonymous";

UPDATE SEP 2019
Yes, JS now supports this.
Optional chaining is coming soon to v8 read more

This is more commonly known as a null-coalescing operator. Javascript does not have one.

I have a solution for that, tailor it to your own needs, an excerpt from one of my libs:
elvisStructureSeparator: '.',
// An Elvis operator replacement. See:
// http://coffeescript.org/ --> The Existential Operator
// http://fantom.org/doc/docLang/Expressions.html#safeInvoke
//
// The fn parameter has a SPECIAL SYNTAX. E.g.
// some.structure['with a selector like this'].value transforms to
// 'some.structure.with a selector like this.value' as an fn parameter.
//
// Configurable with tulebox.elvisStructureSeparator.
//
// Usage examples:
// tulebox.elvis(scope, 'arbitrary.path.to.a.function', fnParamA, fnParamB, fnParamC);
// tulebox.elvis(this, 'currentNode.favicon.filename');
elvis: function (scope, fn) {
tulebox.dbg('tulebox.elvis(' + scope + ', ' + fn + ', args...)');
var implicitMsg = '....implicit value: undefined ';
if (arguments.length < 2) {
tulebox.dbg(implicitMsg + '(1)');
return undefined;
}
// prepare args
var args = [].slice.call(arguments, 2);
if (scope === null || fn === null || scope === undefined || fn === undefined
|| typeof fn !== 'string') {
tulebox.dbg(implicitMsg + '(2)');
return undefined;
}
// check levels
var levels = fn.split(tulebox.elvisStructureSeparator);
if (levels.length < 1) {
tulebox.dbg(implicitMsg + '(3)');
return undefined;
}
var lastLevel = scope;
for (var i = 0; i < levels.length; i++) {
if (lastLevel[levels[i]] === undefined) {
tulebox.dbg(implicitMsg + '(4)');
return undefined;
}
lastLevel = lastLevel[levels[i]];
}
// real return value
if (typeof lastLevel === 'function') {
var ret = lastLevel.apply(scope, args);
tulebox.dbg('....function value: ' + ret);
return ret;
} else {
tulebox.dbg('....direct value: ' + lastLevel);
return lastLevel;
}
},
works like a charm. Enjoy the less pain!

You could roll your own:
function resolve(objectToGetValueFrom, stringOfDotSeparatedParameters) {
var returnObject = objectToGetValueFrom,
parameters = stringOfDotSeparatedParameters.split('.'),
i,
parameter;
for (i = 0; i < parameters.length; i++) {
parameter = parameters[i];
returnObject = returnObject[parameter];
if (returnObject === undefined) {
break;
}
}
return returnObject;
};
And use it like this:
var result = resolve(obj, 'a.b.c.d');
* result is undefined if any one of a, b, c or d is undefined.

I read this article (https://www.beyondjava.net/elvis-operator-aka-safe-navigation-javascript-typescript) and modified the solution using Proxies.
function safe(obj) {
return new Proxy(obj, {
get: function(target, name) {
const result = target[name];
if (!!result) {
return (result instanceof Object)? safe(result) : result;
}
return safe.nullObj;
},
});
}
safe.nullObj = safe({});
safe.safeGet= function(obj, expression) {
let safeObj = safe(obj);
let safeResult = expression(safeObj);
if (safeResult === safe.nullObj) {
return undefined;
}
return safeResult;
}
You call it like this:
safe.safeGet(example, (x) => x.foo.woo)
The result will be undefined for an expression that encounters null or undefined along its path. You could go wild and modify the Object prototype!
Object.prototype.getSafe = function (expression) {
return safe.safeGet(this, expression);
};
example.getSafe((x) => x.foo.woo);

Jumping in very late, there's a proposal[1] for optional chaining currently at stage 2, with a babel plugin[2] available. It's not currently in any browser I am aware of.
https://github.com/tc39/proposal-optional-chaining
https://www.npmjs.com/package/#babel/plugin-proposal-optional-chaining

This was a problem for me for a long time. I had to come up with a solution that can be easily migrated once we get Elvis operator or something.
This is what I use; works for both arrays and objects
put this in tools.js file or something
// this will create the object/array if null
Object.prototype.__ = function (prop) {
if (this[prop] === undefined)
this[prop] = typeof prop == 'number' ? [] : {}
return this[prop]
};
// this will just check if object/array is null
Object.prototype._ = function (prop) {
return this[prop] === undefined ? {} : this[prop]
};
usage example:
let student = {
classes: [
'math',
'whatev'
],
scores: {
math: 9,
whatev: 20
},
loans: [
200,
{ 'hey': 'sup' },
500,
300,
8000,
3000000
]
}
// use one underscore to test
console.log(student._('classes')._(0)) // math
console.log(student._('classes')._(3)) // {}
console.log(student._('sports')._(3)._('injuries')) // {}
console.log(student._('scores')._('whatev')) // 20
console.log(student._('blabla')._('whatev')) // {}
console.log(student._('loans')._(2)) // 500
console.log(student._('loans')._(1)._('hey')) // sup
console.log(student._('loans')._(6)._('hey')) // {}
// use two underscores to create if null
student.__('loans').__(6)['test'] = 'whatev'
console.log(student.__('loans').__(6).__('test')) // whatev
well I know it makes the code a bit unreadable but it's a simple one liner solution and works great. I hope it helps someone :)

This was an interesting solution for the safe navigation operator using some mixin..
http://jsfiddle.net/avernet/npcmv/
// Assume you have the following data structure
var companies = {
orbeon: {
cfo: "Erik",
cto: "Alex"
}
};
// Extend Underscore.js
_.mixin({
// Safe navigation
attr: function(obj, name) { return obj == null ? obj : obj[name]; },
// So we can chain console.log
log: function(obj) { console.log(obj); }
});
// Shortcut, 'cause I'm lazy
var C = _(companies).chain();
// Simple case: returns Erik
C.attr("orbeon").attr("cfo").log();
// Simple case too, no CEO in Orbeon, returns undefined
C.attr("orbeon").attr("ceo").log();
// IBM unknown, but doesn't lead to an error, returns undefined
C.attr("ibm").attr("ceo").log();

I created a package that makes this a lot easier to use.
NPM jsdig
Github jsdig
You can handle simple things like and object:
const world = {
locations: {
europe: 'Munich',
usa: 'Indianapolis'
}
};
world.dig('locations', 'usa');
// => 'Indianapolis'
world.dig('locations', 'asia', 'japan');
// => 'null'
or a little more complicated:
const germany = () => 'germany';
const world = [0, 1, { location: { europe: germany } }, 3];
world.dig(2, 'location', 'europe') === germany;
world.dig(2, 'location', 'europe')() === 'germany';

?? would work in js which is equivalent to ?: in kotlin

Personally i use
function e(e,expr){try{return eval(expr);}catch(e){return null;}};
and for example safe get:
var a = e(obj,'e.x.y.z.searchedField');

Related

Javascript: using ternary operator to return default value if a function returns undefined [duplicate]

I know that I can test for a JavaScript variable and then define it if it is undefined, but is there not some way of saying
var setVariable = localStorage.getItem('value') || 0;
seems like a much clearer way, and I'm pretty sure I've seen this in other languages.
Yes, it can do that, but strictly speaking that will assign the default value if the retrieved value is falsey, as opposed to truly undefined. It would therefore not only match undefined but also null, false, 0, NaN, "" (but not "0").
If you want to set to default only if the variable is strictly undefined then the safest way is to write:
var x = (typeof x === 'undefined') ? your_default_value : x;
On newer browsers it's actually safe to write:
var x = (x === undefined) ? your_default_value : x;
but be aware that it is possible to subvert this on older browsers where it was permitted to declare a variable named undefined that has a defined value, causing the test to fail.
Logical nullish assignment, ES2020+ solution
New operators are currently being added to the browsers, ??=, ||=, and &&=. This post will focus on ??=.
This checks if left side is undefined or null, short-circuiting if already defined. If not, the right-side is assigned to the left-side variable.
Comparing Methods
// Using ??=
name ??= "Dave"
// Previously, ES2020
name = name ?? "Dave"
// or
if (typeof name === "undefined" || name === null) {
name = true
}
// Before that (not equivalent, but commonly used)
name = name || "Dave" // Now: name ||= "Dave"
Basic Examples
let a // undefined
let b = null
let c = false
a ??= true // true
b ??= true // true
c ??= true // false
Object/Array Examples
let x = ["foo"]
let y = { foo: "fizz" }
x[0] ??= "bar" // "foo"
x[1] ??= "bar" // "bar"
y.foo ??= "buzz" // "fizz"
y.bar ??= "buzz" // "buzz"
x // Array [ "foo", "bar" ]
y // Object { foo: "fizz", bar: "buzz" }
??= Browser Support Oct 2022 - 93%
??= Mozilla Documentation
||= Mozilla Documentation
&&= Mozilla Documentation
The 2018 ES6 answer is:
return Object.is(x, undefined) ? y : x;
If variable x is undefined, return variable y... otherwise if variable x is defined, return variable x.
ES2020 Answer
With the Nullish Coalescing Operator, you can set a default value if value is null or undefined.
const setVariable = localStorage.getItem('value') ?? 0;
However, you should be aware that the nullish coalescing operator does not return the default value for other types of falsy value such as 0 and ''.
However, do take note of the browser support. You may need to use a JavaScript compiler like Babel to convert it into something more backward compatible. If you are using Node.js, it has been supported since version 14.
I needed to "set a variable if undefined" in several places. I created a function using #Alnitak answer. Hopefully it helps someone.
function setDefaultVal(value, defaultValue){
return (value === undefined) ? defaultValue : value;
}
Usage:
hasPoints = setDefaultVal(this.hasPoints, true);
It seems more logical to check typeof instead of undefined? I assume you expect a number as you set the var to 0 when undefined:
var getVariable = localStorage.getItem('value');
var setVariable = (typeof getVariable == 'number') ? getVariable : 0;
In this case if getVariable is not a number (string, object, whatever), setVariable is set to 0
In our days you actually can do your approach with JS:
// Your variable is null
// or '', 0, false, undefined
let x = null;
// Set default value
x = x || 'default value';
console.log(x); // default value
So your example WILL work:
const setVariable = localStorage.getItem('value') || 0;
You can use any of below ways.
let x;
let y = 4;
x || (x = y)
in ES12 or after
let x;
let y = 4;
x ||= y;
If you're a FP (functional programming) fan, Ramda has a neat helper function for this called defaultTo :
usage:
const result = defaultTo(30)(value)
It's more useful when dealing with undefined boolean values:
const result2 = defaultTo(false)(dashboard.someValue)
var setVariable = (typeof localStorage.getItem('value') !== 'undefined' && localStorage.getItem('value')) || 0;
Ran into this scenario today as well where I didn't want zero to be overwritten for several values. We have a file with some common utility methods for scenarios like this. Here's what I added to handle the scenario and be flexible.
function getIfNotSet(value, newValue, overwriteNull, overwriteZero) {
if (typeof (value) === 'undefined') {
return newValue;
} else if (value === null && overwriteNull === true) {
return newValue;
} else if (value === 0 && overwriteZero === true) {
return newValue;
} else {
return value;
}
}
It can then be called with the last two parameters being optional if I want to only set for undefined values or also overwrite null or 0 values. Here's an example of a call to it that will set the ID to -1 if the ID is undefined or null, but wont overwrite a 0 value.
data.ID = Util.getIfNotSet(data.ID, -1, true);
Works even if the default value is a boolean value:
var setVariable = ( (b = 0) => b )( localStorage.getItem('value') );
It seems to me, that for current javascript implementations,
var [result='default']=[possiblyUndefinedValue]
is a nice way to do this (using object deconstruction).

How to check if an object exists before getting value? [duplicate]

In my code, I deal with an array that has some entries with many objects nested inside one another, where as some do not. It looks something like the following:
// where this array is hundreds of entries long, with a mix
// of the two examples given
var test = [{'a':{'b':{'c':"foo"}}}, {'a': "bar"}];
This is giving me problems because I need to iterate through the array at times, and the inconsistency is throwing me errors like so:
for (i=0; i<test.length; i++) {
// ok on i==0, but 'cannot read property of undefined' on i==1
console.log(a.b.c);
}
I am aware that I can say if(a.b){ console.log(a.b.c)}, but this is extraordinarily tedious in cases where there are up to 5 or 6 objects nested within one another. Is there any other (easier) way that I can have it ONLY do the console.log if it exists, but without throwing an error?
Update:
If you use JavaScript according to ECMAScript 2020 or later, see optional chaining.
TypeScript has added support for optional chaining in version 3.7.
// use it like this
obj?.a?.lot?.of?.properties
Solution for JavaScript before ECMASCript 2020 or TypeScript older than version 3.7:
A quick workaround is using a try/catch helper function with ES6 arrow function:
function getSafe(fn, defaultVal) {
try {
return fn();
} catch (e) {
return defaultVal;
}
}
// use it like this
console.log(getSafe(() => obj.a.lot.of.properties));
// or add an optional default value
console.log(getSafe(() => obj.a.lot.of.properties, 'nothing'));
What you are doing raises an exception (and rightfully so).
You can always do:
try{
window.a.b.c
}catch(e){
console.log("YO",e)
}
But I wouldn't, instead think of your use case.
Why are you accessing data, 6 levels nested that you are unfamiliar of? What use case justifies this?
Usually, you'd like to actually validate what sort of object you're dealing with.
Also, on a side note you should not use statements like if(a.b) because it will return false if a.b is 0 or even if it is "0". Instead check if a.b !== undefined
If I am understanding your question correctly, you want the safest way to determine if an object contains a property.
The easiest way is to use the in operator.
window.a = "aString";
//window should have 'a' property
//lets test if it exists
if ("a" in window){
//true
}
if ("b" in window){
//false
}
Of course you can nest this as deep as you want
if ("a" in window.b.c) { }
Not sure if this helps.
Try this. If a.b is undefined, it will leave the if statement without any exception.
if (a.b && a.b.c) {
console.log(a.b.c);
}
If you are using lodash, you could use their has function. It is similar to the native "in", but allows paths.
var testObject = {a: {b: {c: 'walrus'}}};
if(_.has(testObject, 'a.b.c')) {
//Safely access your walrus here
}
If you use Babel, you can already use the optional chaining syntax with #babel/plugin-proposal-optional-chaining Babel plugin. This would allow you to replace this:
console.log(a && a.b && a.b.c);
with this:
console.log(a?.b?.c);
If you have lodash you can use its .get method
_.get(a, 'b.c.d.e')
or give it a default value
_.get(a, 'b.c.d.e', default)
I use undefsafe religiously. It tests each level down into your object until it either gets the value you asked for, or it returns "undefined". But never errors.
This is a common issue when working with deep or complex json object, so I try to avoid try/catch or embedding multiple checks which would make the code unreadable, I usually use this little piece of code in all my procect to do the job.
/* ex: getProperty(myObj,'aze.xyz',0) // return myObj.aze.xyz safely
* accepts array for property names:
* getProperty(myObj,['aze','xyz'],{value: null})
*/
function getProperty(obj, props, defaultValue) {
var res, isvoid = function(x){return typeof x === "undefined" || x === null;}
if(!isvoid(obj)){
if(isvoid(props)) props = [];
if(typeof props === "string") props = props.trim().split(".");
if(props.constructor === Array){
res = props.length>1 ? getProperty(obj[props.shift()],props,defaultValue) : obj[props[0]];
}
}
return typeof res === "undefined" ? defaultValue: res;
}
I like Cao Shouguang's answer, but I am not fond of passing a function as parameter into the getSafe function each time I do the call. I have modified the getSafe function to accept simple parameters and pure ES5.
/**
* Safely get object properties.
* #param {*} prop The property of the object to retrieve
* #param {*} defaultVal The value returned if the property value does not exist
* #returns If property of object exists it is returned,
* else the default value is returned.
* #example
* var myObj = {a : {b : 'c'} };
* var value;
*
* value = getSafe(myObj.a.b,'No Value'); //returns c
* value = getSafe(myObj.a.x,'No Value'); //returns 'No Value'
*
* if (getSafe(myObj.a.x, false)){
* console.log('Found')
* } else {
* console.log('Not Found')
* }; //logs 'Not Found'
*
* if(value = getSafe(myObj.a.b, false)){
* console.log('New Value is', value); //logs 'New Value is c'
* }
*/
function getSafe(prop, defaultVal) {
return function(fn, defaultVal) {
try {
if (fn() === undefined) {
return defaultVal;
} else {
return fn();
}
} catch (e) {
return defaultVal;
}
}(function() {return prop}, defaultVal);
}
Lodash has a get method which allows for a default as an optional third parameter, as show below:
const myObject = {
has: 'some',
missing: {
vars: true
}
}
const path = 'missing.const.value';
const myValue = _.get(myObject, path, 'default');
console.log(myValue) // prints out default, which is specified above
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.11/lodash.js"></script>
Imagine that we want to apply a series of functions to x if and only if x is non-null:
if (x !== null) x = a(x);
if (x !== null) x = b(x);
if (x !== null) x = c(x);
Now let's say that we need to do the same to y:
if (y !== null) y = a(y);
if (y !== null) y = b(y);
if (y !== null) y = c(y);
And the same to z:
if (z !== null) z = a(z);
if (z !== null) z = b(z);
if (z !== null) z = c(z);
As you can see without a proper abstraction, we'll end up duplicating code over and over again. Such an abstraction already exists: the Maybe monad.
The Maybe monad holds both a value and a computational context:
The monad keeps the value safe and applies functions to it.
The computational context is a null check before applying a function.
A naive implementation would look like this:
⚠️ This implementation is for illustration purpose only! This is not how it should be done and is wrong at many levels. However this should give you a better idea of what I am talking about.
As you can see nothing can break:
We apply a series of functions to our value
If at any point, the value becomes null (or undefined) we just don't apply any function anymore.
const abc = obj =>
Maybe
.of(obj)
.map(o => o.a)
.map(o => o.b)
.map(o => o.c)
.value;
const values = [
{},
{a: {}},
{a: {b: {}}},
{a: {b: {c: 42}}}
];
console.log(
values.map(abc)
);
<script>
function Maybe(x) {
this.value = x; //-> container for our value
}
Maybe.of = x => new Maybe(x);
Maybe.prototype.map = function (fn) {
if (this.value == null) { //-> computational context
return this;
}
return Maybe.of(fn(this.value));
};
</script>
Appendix 1
I cannot explain what monads are as this is not the purpose of this post and there are people out there better at this than I am. However as Eric Elliot said in hist blog post JavaScript Monads Made Simple:
Regardless of your skill level or understanding of category theory, using monads makes your code easier to work with. Failing to take advantage of monads may make your code harder to work with (e.g., callback hell, nested conditional branches, more verbosity).
Appendix 2
Here's how I'd solve your issue using the Maybe monad from monetjs
const prop = key => obj => Maybe.fromNull(obj[key]);
const abc = obj =>
Maybe
.fromNull(obj)
.flatMap(prop('a'))
.flatMap(prop('b'))
.flatMap(prop('c'))
.orSome('🌯')
const values = [
{},
{a: {}},
{a: {b: {}}},
{a: {b: {c: 42}}}
];
console.log(
values.map(abc)
);
<script src="https://www.unpkg.com/monet#0.9.0/dist/monet.js"></script>
<script>const {Maybe} = Monet;</script>
In str's answer, value 'undefined' will be returned instead of the set default value if the property is undefined. This sometimes can cause bugs. The following will make sure the defaultVal will always be returned when either the property or the object is undefined.
const temp = {};
console.log(getSafe(()=>temp.prop, '0'));
function getSafe(fn, defaultVal) {
try {
if (fn() === undefined || fn() === null) {
return defaultVal
} else {
return fn();
}
} catch (e) {
return defaultVal;
}
}
You can use optional chaining from the ECMAScript standart.
Like this:
a?.b?.c?.d?.func?.()
I answered this before and happened to be doing a similar check today. A simplification to check if a nested dotted property exists. You could modify this to return the value, or some default to accomplish your goal.
function containsProperty(instance, propertyName) {
// make an array of properties to walk through because propertyName can be nested
// ex "test.test2.test.test"
let walkArr = propertyName.indexOf('.') > 0 ? propertyName.split('.') : [propertyName];
// walk the tree - if any property does not exist then return false
for (let treeDepth = 0, maxDepth = walkArr.length; treeDepth < maxDepth; treeDepth++) {
// property does not exist
if (!Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty.call(instance, walkArr[treeDepth])) {
return false;
}
// does it exist - reassign the leaf
instance = instance[walkArr[treeDepth]];
}
// default
return true;
}
In your question you could do something like:
let test = [{'a':{'b':{'c':"foo"}}}, {'a': "bar"}];
containsProperty(test[0], 'a.b.c');
I usually use like this:
var x = object.any ? object.any.a : 'def';
You can avoid getting an error by giving a default value before getting the property
var test = [{'a':{'b':{'c':"foo"}}}, {'a': "bar"}];
for (i=0; i<test.length; i++) {
const obj = test[i]
// No error, just undefined, which is ok
console.log(((obj.a || {}).b || {}).c);
}
This works great with arrays too:
const entries = [{id: 1, name: 'Scarllet'}]
// Giving a default name when is empty
const name = (entries.find(v => v.id === 100) || []).name || 'no-name'
console.log(name)
Unrelated to the question's actual question, but might be useful for people coming to this question looking for answers.
Check your function parameters.
If you have a function like const x({ a }) => { }, and you call it without arguments x(); append = {} to the parameter: const x({ a } = {}) => { }.
What I had
I had a function like this:
const x = ({ a }) => console.log(a);
// This one works as expected
x({ a: 1 });
// This one errors out
x();
Which results in "Uncaught TypeError: Cannot destructure property 'a' of 'undefined' as it is undefined."
What I switched it to (now works).
const x = ({ a } = {}) => console.log(a);
// This one works as expected
x({ a: 1 });
// This now works too!
x();

How to pass props from a container component to a class component [duplicate]

In my code, I deal with an array that has some entries with many objects nested inside one another, where as some do not. It looks something like the following:
// where this array is hundreds of entries long, with a mix
// of the two examples given
var test = [{'a':{'b':{'c':"foo"}}}, {'a': "bar"}];
This is giving me problems because I need to iterate through the array at times, and the inconsistency is throwing me errors like so:
for (i=0; i<test.length; i++) {
// ok on i==0, but 'cannot read property of undefined' on i==1
console.log(a.b.c);
}
I am aware that I can say if(a.b){ console.log(a.b.c)}, but this is extraordinarily tedious in cases where there are up to 5 or 6 objects nested within one another. Is there any other (easier) way that I can have it ONLY do the console.log if it exists, but without throwing an error?
Update:
If you use JavaScript according to ECMAScript 2020 or later, see optional chaining.
TypeScript has added support for optional chaining in version 3.7.
// use it like this
obj?.a?.lot?.of?.properties
Solution for JavaScript before ECMASCript 2020 or TypeScript older than version 3.7:
A quick workaround is using a try/catch helper function with ES6 arrow function:
function getSafe(fn, defaultVal) {
try {
return fn();
} catch (e) {
return defaultVal;
}
}
// use it like this
console.log(getSafe(() => obj.a.lot.of.properties));
// or add an optional default value
console.log(getSafe(() => obj.a.lot.of.properties, 'nothing'));
What you are doing raises an exception (and rightfully so).
You can always do:
try{
window.a.b.c
}catch(e){
console.log("YO",e)
}
But I wouldn't, instead think of your use case.
Why are you accessing data, 6 levels nested that you are unfamiliar of? What use case justifies this?
Usually, you'd like to actually validate what sort of object you're dealing with.
Also, on a side note you should not use statements like if(a.b) because it will return false if a.b is 0 or even if it is "0". Instead check if a.b !== undefined
If I am understanding your question correctly, you want the safest way to determine if an object contains a property.
The easiest way is to use the in operator.
window.a = "aString";
//window should have 'a' property
//lets test if it exists
if ("a" in window){
//true
}
if ("b" in window){
//false
}
Of course you can nest this as deep as you want
if ("a" in window.b.c) { }
Not sure if this helps.
Try this. If a.b is undefined, it will leave the if statement without any exception.
if (a.b && a.b.c) {
console.log(a.b.c);
}
If you are using lodash, you could use their has function. It is similar to the native "in", but allows paths.
var testObject = {a: {b: {c: 'walrus'}}};
if(_.has(testObject, 'a.b.c')) {
//Safely access your walrus here
}
If you use Babel, you can already use the optional chaining syntax with #babel/plugin-proposal-optional-chaining Babel plugin. This would allow you to replace this:
console.log(a && a.b && a.b.c);
with this:
console.log(a?.b?.c);
If you have lodash you can use its .get method
_.get(a, 'b.c.d.e')
or give it a default value
_.get(a, 'b.c.d.e', default)
I use undefsafe religiously. It tests each level down into your object until it either gets the value you asked for, or it returns "undefined". But never errors.
This is a common issue when working with deep or complex json object, so I try to avoid try/catch or embedding multiple checks which would make the code unreadable, I usually use this little piece of code in all my procect to do the job.
/* ex: getProperty(myObj,'aze.xyz',0) // return myObj.aze.xyz safely
* accepts array for property names:
* getProperty(myObj,['aze','xyz'],{value: null})
*/
function getProperty(obj, props, defaultValue) {
var res, isvoid = function(x){return typeof x === "undefined" || x === null;}
if(!isvoid(obj)){
if(isvoid(props)) props = [];
if(typeof props === "string") props = props.trim().split(".");
if(props.constructor === Array){
res = props.length>1 ? getProperty(obj[props.shift()],props,defaultValue) : obj[props[0]];
}
}
return typeof res === "undefined" ? defaultValue: res;
}
I like Cao Shouguang's answer, but I am not fond of passing a function as parameter into the getSafe function each time I do the call. I have modified the getSafe function to accept simple parameters and pure ES5.
/**
* Safely get object properties.
* #param {*} prop The property of the object to retrieve
* #param {*} defaultVal The value returned if the property value does not exist
* #returns If property of object exists it is returned,
* else the default value is returned.
* #example
* var myObj = {a : {b : 'c'} };
* var value;
*
* value = getSafe(myObj.a.b,'No Value'); //returns c
* value = getSafe(myObj.a.x,'No Value'); //returns 'No Value'
*
* if (getSafe(myObj.a.x, false)){
* console.log('Found')
* } else {
* console.log('Not Found')
* }; //logs 'Not Found'
*
* if(value = getSafe(myObj.a.b, false)){
* console.log('New Value is', value); //logs 'New Value is c'
* }
*/
function getSafe(prop, defaultVal) {
return function(fn, defaultVal) {
try {
if (fn() === undefined) {
return defaultVal;
} else {
return fn();
}
} catch (e) {
return defaultVal;
}
}(function() {return prop}, defaultVal);
}
Lodash has a get method which allows for a default as an optional third parameter, as show below:
const myObject = {
has: 'some',
missing: {
vars: true
}
}
const path = 'missing.const.value';
const myValue = _.get(myObject, path, 'default');
console.log(myValue) // prints out default, which is specified above
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.11/lodash.js"></script>
Imagine that we want to apply a series of functions to x if and only if x is non-null:
if (x !== null) x = a(x);
if (x !== null) x = b(x);
if (x !== null) x = c(x);
Now let's say that we need to do the same to y:
if (y !== null) y = a(y);
if (y !== null) y = b(y);
if (y !== null) y = c(y);
And the same to z:
if (z !== null) z = a(z);
if (z !== null) z = b(z);
if (z !== null) z = c(z);
As you can see without a proper abstraction, we'll end up duplicating code over and over again. Such an abstraction already exists: the Maybe monad.
The Maybe monad holds both a value and a computational context:
The monad keeps the value safe and applies functions to it.
The computational context is a null check before applying a function.
A naive implementation would look like this:
⚠️ This implementation is for illustration purpose only! This is not how it should be done and is wrong at many levels. However this should give you a better idea of what I am talking about.
As you can see nothing can break:
We apply a series of functions to our value
If at any point, the value becomes null (or undefined) we just don't apply any function anymore.
const abc = obj =>
Maybe
.of(obj)
.map(o => o.a)
.map(o => o.b)
.map(o => o.c)
.value;
const values = [
{},
{a: {}},
{a: {b: {}}},
{a: {b: {c: 42}}}
];
console.log(
values.map(abc)
);
<script>
function Maybe(x) {
this.value = x; //-> container for our value
}
Maybe.of = x => new Maybe(x);
Maybe.prototype.map = function (fn) {
if (this.value == null) { //-> computational context
return this;
}
return Maybe.of(fn(this.value));
};
</script>
Appendix 1
I cannot explain what monads are as this is not the purpose of this post and there are people out there better at this than I am. However as Eric Elliot said in hist blog post JavaScript Monads Made Simple:
Regardless of your skill level or understanding of category theory, using monads makes your code easier to work with. Failing to take advantage of monads may make your code harder to work with (e.g., callback hell, nested conditional branches, more verbosity).
Appendix 2
Here's how I'd solve your issue using the Maybe monad from monetjs
const prop = key => obj => Maybe.fromNull(obj[key]);
const abc = obj =>
Maybe
.fromNull(obj)
.flatMap(prop('a'))
.flatMap(prop('b'))
.flatMap(prop('c'))
.orSome('🌯')
const values = [
{},
{a: {}},
{a: {b: {}}},
{a: {b: {c: 42}}}
];
console.log(
values.map(abc)
);
<script src="https://www.unpkg.com/monet#0.9.0/dist/monet.js"></script>
<script>const {Maybe} = Monet;</script>
In str's answer, value 'undefined' will be returned instead of the set default value if the property is undefined. This sometimes can cause bugs. The following will make sure the defaultVal will always be returned when either the property or the object is undefined.
const temp = {};
console.log(getSafe(()=>temp.prop, '0'));
function getSafe(fn, defaultVal) {
try {
if (fn() === undefined || fn() === null) {
return defaultVal
} else {
return fn();
}
} catch (e) {
return defaultVal;
}
}
You can use optional chaining from the ECMAScript standart.
Like this:
a?.b?.c?.d?.func?.()
I answered this before and happened to be doing a similar check today. A simplification to check if a nested dotted property exists. You could modify this to return the value, or some default to accomplish your goal.
function containsProperty(instance, propertyName) {
// make an array of properties to walk through because propertyName can be nested
// ex "test.test2.test.test"
let walkArr = propertyName.indexOf('.') > 0 ? propertyName.split('.') : [propertyName];
// walk the tree - if any property does not exist then return false
for (let treeDepth = 0, maxDepth = walkArr.length; treeDepth < maxDepth; treeDepth++) {
// property does not exist
if (!Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty.call(instance, walkArr[treeDepth])) {
return false;
}
// does it exist - reassign the leaf
instance = instance[walkArr[treeDepth]];
}
// default
return true;
}
In your question you could do something like:
let test = [{'a':{'b':{'c':"foo"}}}, {'a': "bar"}];
containsProperty(test[0], 'a.b.c');
I usually use like this:
var x = object.any ? object.any.a : 'def';
You can avoid getting an error by giving a default value before getting the property
var test = [{'a':{'b':{'c':"foo"}}}, {'a': "bar"}];
for (i=0; i<test.length; i++) {
const obj = test[i]
// No error, just undefined, which is ok
console.log(((obj.a || {}).b || {}).c);
}
This works great with arrays too:
const entries = [{id: 1, name: 'Scarllet'}]
// Giving a default name when is empty
const name = (entries.find(v => v.id === 100) || []).name || 'no-name'
console.log(name)
Unrelated to the question's actual question, but might be useful for people coming to this question looking for answers.
Check your function parameters.
If you have a function like const x({ a }) => { }, and you call it without arguments x(); append = {} to the parameter: const x({ a } = {}) => { }.
What I had
I had a function like this:
const x = ({ a }) => console.log(a);
// This one works as expected
x({ a: 1 });
// This one errors out
x();
Which results in "Uncaught TypeError: Cannot destructure property 'a' of 'undefined' as it is undefined."
What I switched it to (now works).
const x = ({ a } = {}) => console.log(a);
// This one works as expected
x({ a: 1 });
// This now works too!
x();

How to avoid 'cannot read property of undefined' errors?

In my code, I deal with an array that has some entries with many objects nested inside one another, where as some do not. It looks something like the following:
// where this array is hundreds of entries long, with a mix
// of the two examples given
var test = [{'a':{'b':{'c':"foo"}}}, {'a': "bar"}];
This is giving me problems because I need to iterate through the array at times, and the inconsistency is throwing me errors like so:
for (i=0; i<test.length; i++) {
// ok on i==0, but 'cannot read property of undefined' on i==1
console.log(a.b.c);
}
I am aware that I can say if(a.b){ console.log(a.b.c)}, but this is extraordinarily tedious in cases where there are up to 5 or 6 objects nested within one another. Is there any other (easier) way that I can have it ONLY do the console.log if it exists, but without throwing an error?
Update:
If you use JavaScript according to ECMAScript 2020 or later, see optional chaining.
TypeScript has added support for optional chaining in version 3.7.
// use it like this
obj?.a?.lot?.of?.properties
Solution for JavaScript before ECMASCript 2020 or TypeScript older than version 3.7:
A quick workaround is using a try/catch helper function with ES6 arrow function:
function getSafe(fn, defaultVal) {
try {
return fn();
} catch (e) {
return defaultVal;
}
}
// use it like this
console.log(getSafe(() => obj.a.lot.of.properties));
// or add an optional default value
console.log(getSafe(() => obj.a.lot.of.properties, 'nothing'));
What you are doing raises an exception (and rightfully so).
You can always do:
try{
window.a.b.c
}catch(e){
console.log("YO",e)
}
But I wouldn't, instead think of your use case.
Why are you accessing data, 6 levels nested that you are unfamiliar of? What use case justifies this?
Usually, you'd like to actually validate what sort of object you're dealing with.
Also, on a side note you should not use statements like if(a.b) because it will return false if a.b is 0 or even if it is "0". Instead check if a.b !== undefined
If I am understanding your question correctly, you want the safest way to determine if an object contains a property.
The easiest way is to use the in operator.
window.a = "aString";
//window should have 'a' property
//lets test if it exists
if ("a" in window){
//true
}
if ("b" in window){
//false
}
Of course you can nest this as deep as you want
if ("a" in window.b.c) { }
Not sure if this helps.
Try this. If a.b is undefined, it will leave the if statement without any exception.
if (a.b && a.b.c) {
console.log(a.b.c);
}
If you are using lodash, you could use their has function. It is similar to the native "in", but allows paths.
var testObject = {a: {b: {c: 'walrus'}}};
if(_.has(testObject, 'a.b.c')) {
//Safely access your walrus here
}
If you use Babel, you can already use the optional chaining syntax with #babel/plugin-proposal-optional-chaining Babel plugin. This would allow you to replace this:
console.log(a && a.b && a.b.c);
with this:
console.log(a?.b?.c);
If you have lodash you can use its .get method
_.get(a, 'b.c.d.e')
or give it a default value
_.get(a, 'b.c.d.e', default)
I use undefsafe religiously. It tests each level down into your object until it either gets the value you asked for, or it returns "undefined". But never errors.
This is a common issue when working with deep or complex json object, so I try to avoid try/catch or embedding multiple checks which would make the code unreadable, I usually use this little piece of code in all my procect to do the job.
/* ex: getProperty(myObj,'aze.xyz',0) // return myObj.aze.xyz safely
* accepts array for property names:
* getProperty(myObj,['aze','xyz'],{value: null})
*/
function getProperty(obj, props, defaultValue) {
var res, isvoid = function(x){return typeof x === "undefined" || x === null;}
if(!isvoid(obj)){
if(isvoid(props)) props = [];
if(typeof props === "string") props = props.trim().split(".");
if(props.constructor === Array){
res = props.length>1 ? getProperty(obj[props.shift()],props,defaultValue) : obj[props[0]];
}
}
return typeof res === "undefined" ? defaultValue: res;
}
I like Cao Shouguang's answer, but I am not fond of passing a function as parameter into the getSafe function each time I do the call. I have modified the getSafe function to accept simple parameters and pure ES5.
/**
* Safely get object properties.
* #param {*} prop The property of the object to retrieve
* #param {*} defaultVal The value returned if the property value does not exist
* #returns If property of object exists it is returned,
* else the default value is returned.
* #example
* var myObj = {a : {b : 'c'} };
* var value;
*
* value = getSafe(myObj.a.b,'No Value'); //returns c
* value = getSafe(myObj.a.x,'No Value'); //returns 'No Value'
*
* if (getSafe(myObj.a.x, false)){
* console.log('Found')
* } else {
* console.log('Not Found')
* }; //logs 'Not Found'
*
* if(value = getSafe(myObj.a.b, false)){
* console.log('New Value is', value); //logs 'New Value is c'
* }
*/
function getSafe(prop, defaultVal) {
return function(fn, defaultVal) {
try {
if (fn() === undefined) {
return defaultVal;
} else {
return fn();
}
} catch (e) {
return defaultVal;
}
}(function() {return prop}, defaultVal);
}
Lodash has a get method which allows for a default as an optional third parameter, as show below:
const myObject = {
has: 'some',
missing: {
vars: true
}
}
const path = 'missing.const.value';
const myValue = _.get(myObject, path, 'default');
console.log(myValue) // prints out default, which is specified above
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.11/lodash.js"></script>
Imagine that we want to apply a series of functions to x if and only if x is non-null:
if (x !== null) x = a(x);
if (x !== null) x = b(x);
if (x !== null) x = c(x);
Now let's say that we need to do the same to y:
if (y !== null) y = a(y);
if (y !== null) y = b(y);
if (y !== null) y = c(y);
And the same to z:
if (z !== null) z = a(z);
if (z !== null) z = b(z);
if (z !== null) z = c(z);
As you can see without a proper abstraction, we'll end up duplicating code over and over again. Such an abstraction already exists: the Maybe monad.
The Maybe monad holds both a value and a computational context:
The monad keeps the value safe and applies functions to it.
The computational context is a null check before applying a function.
A naive implementation would look like this:
⚠️ This implementation is for illustration purpose only! This is not how it should be done and is wrong at many levels. However this should give you a better idea of what I am talking about.
As you can see nothing can break:
We apply a series of functions to our value
If at any point, the value becomes null (or undefined) we just don't apply any function anymore.
const abc = obj =>
Maybe
.of(obj)
.map(o => o.a)
.map(o => o.b)
.map(o => o.c)
.value;
const values = [
{},
{a: {}},
{a: {b: {}}},
{a: {b: {c: 42}}}
];
console.log(
values.map(abc)
);
<script>
function Maybe(x) {
this.value = x; //-> container for our value
}
Maybe.of = x => new Maybe(x);
Maybe.prototype.map = function (fn) {
if (this.value == null) { //-> computational context
return this;
}
return Maybe.of(fn(this.value));
};
</script>
Appendix 1
I cannot explain what monads are as this is not the purpose of this post and there are people out there better at this than I am. However as Eric Elliot said in hist blog post JavaScript Monads Made Simple:
Regardless of your skill level or understanding of category theory, using monads makes your code easier to work with. Failing to take advantage of monads may make your code harder to work with (e.g., callback hell, nested conditional branches, more verbosity).
Appendix 2
Here's how I'd solve your issue using the Maybe monad from monetjs
const prop = key => obj => Maybe.fromNull(obj[key]);
const abc = obj =>
Maybe
.fromNull(obj)
.flatMap(prop('a'))
.flatMap(prop('b'))
.flatMap(prop('c'))
.orSome('🌯')
const values = [
{},
{a: {}},
{a: {b: {}}},
{a: {b: {c: 42}}}
];
console.log(
values.map(abc)
);
<script src="https://www.unpkg.com/monet#0.9.0/dist/monet.js"></script>
<script>const {Maybe} = Monet;</script>
In str's answer, value 'undefined' will be returned instead of the set default value if the property is undefined. This sometimes can cause bugs. The following will make sure the defaultVal will always be returned when either the property or the object is undefined.
const temp = {};
console.log(getSafe(()=>temp.prop, '0'));
function getSafe(fn, defaultVal) {
try {
if (fn() === undefined || fn() === null) {
return defaultVal
} else {
return fn();
}
} catch (e) {
return defaultVal;
}
}
You can use optional chaining from the ECMAScript standart.
Like this:
a?.b?.c?.d?.func?.()
I answered this before and happened to be doing a similar check today. A simplification to check if a nested dotted property exists. You could modify this to return the value, or some default to accomplish your goal.
function containsProperty(instance, propertyName) {
// make an array of properties to walk through because propertyName can be nested
// ex "test.test2.test.test"
let walkArr = propertyName.indexOf('.') > 0 ? propertyName.split('.') : [propertyName];
// walk the tree - if any property does not exist then return false
for (let treeDepth = 0, maxDepth = walkArr.length; treeDepth < maxDepth; treeDepth++) {
// property does not exist
if (!Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty.call(instance, walkArr[treeDepth])) {
return false;
}
// does it exist - reassign the leaf
instance = instance[walkArr[treeDepth]];
}
// default
return true;
}
In your question you could do something like:
let test = [{'a':{'b':{'c':"foo"}}}, {'a': "bar"}];
containsProperty(test[0], 'a.b.c');
I usually use like this:
var x = object.any ? object.any.a : 'def';
You can avoid getting an error by giving a default value before getting the property
var test = [{'a':{'b':{'c':"foo"}}}, {'a': "bar"}];
for (i=0; i<test.length; i++) {
const obj = test[i]
// No error, just undefined, which is ok
console.log(((obj.a || {}).b || {}).c);
}
This works great with arrays too:
const entries = [{id: 1, name: 'Scarllet'}]
// Giving a default name when is empty
const name = (entries.find(v => v.id === 100) || []).name || 'no-name'
console.log(name)
Unrelated to the question's actual question, but might be useful for people coming to this question looking for answers.
Check your function parameters.
If you have a function like const x({ a }) => { }, and you call it without arguments x(); append = {} to the parameter: const x({ a } = {}) => { }.
What I had
I had a function like this:
const x = ({ a }) => console.log(a);
// This one works as expected
x({ a: 1 });
// This one errors out
x();
Which results in "Uncaught TypeError: Cannot destructure property 'a' of 'undefined' as it is undefined."
What I switched it to (now works).
const x = ({ a } = {}) => console.log(a);
// This one works as expected
x({ a: 1 });
// This now works too!
x();

Replace a value if null or undefined in JavaScript

I have a requirement to apply the ?? C# operator to JavaScript and I don't know how.
Consider this in C#:
int i?=null;
int j=i ?? 10;//j is now 10
Now I have this set up in JavaScript:
var options={
filters:{
firstName:'abc'
}
};
var filter=options.filters[0]||'';//should get 'abc' here, it doesn't happen
var filter2=options.filters[1]||'';//should get empty string here, because there is only one filter
How do I do it correctly?
Thanks.
EDIT: I spotted half of the problem: I can't use the 'indexer' notation to objects (my_object[0]). Is there a way to bypass it? (I don't know the names of the filters properties beforehand and don't want to iterate over them).
Here’s the JavaScript equivalent:
var i = null;
var j = i || 10; //j is now 10
Note that the logical operator || does not return a boolean value but the first value that can be converted to true.
Additionally use an array of objects instead of one single object:
var options = {
filters: [
{
name: 'firstName',
value: 'abc'
}
]
};
var filter = options.filters[0] || ''; // is {name:'firstName', value:'abc'}
var filter2 = options.filters[1] || ''; // is ''
That can be accessed by index.
ES2020 Answer
The new Nullish Coalescing Operator, is finally available on JavaScript. However, do take note of the browser support. You may need to use a JavaScript compiler like Babel to convert it into something more backward compatible.
According to the documentation,
The nullish coalescing operator (??) is a logical operator that
returns its right-hand side operand when its left-hand side operand is
null or undefined, and otherwise returns its left-hand side operand.
const options={
filters:{
firstName:'abc'
}
};
const filter = options.filters[0] ?? '';
const filter2 = options.filters[1] ?? '';
This will ensure that both of your variables will have a fallback value of '' if filters[0] or filters[1] are null, or undefined.
Do take note that the nullish coalescing operator does not return the default value for other types of falsy value such as 0 and ''. If you wish to account for all falsy values, you should be using the OR operator ||.
Logical nullish assignment, 2020+ solution
A new operator has been added, ??=. This is equivalent to value = value ?? defaultValue.
||= and &&= are similar, links below.
This checks if left side is undefined or null, short-circuiting if already defined. If not, the left side is assigned the right-side value.
Basic Examples
let a // undefined
let b = null
let c = false
a ??= true // true
b ??= true // true
c ??= true // false
// Equivalent to
a = a ?? true
Object/Array Examples
let x = ["foo"]
let y = { foo: "fizz" }
x[0] ??= "bar" // "foo"
x[1] ??= "bar" // "bar"
y.foo ??= "buzz" // "fizz"
y.bar ??= "buzz" // "buzz"
x // Array [ "foo", "bar" ]
y // Object { foo: "fizz", bar: "buzz" }
Functional Example
function config(options) {
options.duration ??= 100
options.speed ??= 25
return options
}
config({ duration: 555 }) // { duration: 555, speed: 25 }
config({}) // { duration: 100, speed: 25 }
config({ duration: null }) // { duration: 100, speed: 25 }
??= Browser Support Sept 2021 - 90%
??= Mozilla Documentation
||= Mozilla Documentation
&&= Mozilla Documentation
TLDR:
int j=i ?? 10; is perfectly fine to use in javascript also. Just replace int with let.
?? vs ||
?? should be preferred to || because it checks only for nulls and undefined.
All The expressions below are true:
(null || 'x') === 'x' ;
(undefined || 'x') === 'x' ;
//Most of the times you don't want the result below
('' || 'x') === 'x' ;
(0 || 'x') === 'x' ;
(false || 'x') === 'x' ;
//-----
//Using ?? is preferred
(null ?? 'x') === 'x' ;
(undefined ?? 'x') === 'x' ;
//?? works only for null and undefined, which is in general safer
('' ?? 'x') === '' ;
(0 ?? 'x') === 0 ;
(false ?? 'x') === false ;
Asterisk: Check browser compatibility and if you really need to support these other browsers use babel.
I spotted half of the problem: I can't use the 'indexer' notation to objects (my_object[0]). Is there a way to bypass it?
No; an object literal, as the name implies, is an object, and not an array, so you cannot simply retrieve a property based on an index, since there is no specific order of their properties. The only way to retrieve their values is by using the specific name:
var someVar = options.filters.firstName; //Returns 'abc'
Or by iterating over them using the for ... in loop:
for(var p in options.filters) {
var someVar = options.filters[p]; //Returns the property being iterated
}
Destructuring solution
Question content may have changed, so I'll try to answer thoroughly.
Destructuring allows you to pull values out of anything with properties. You can also define default values when null/undefined and name aliases.
const options = {
filters : {
firstName : "abc"
}
}
const {filters: {firstName = "John", lastName = "Smith"}} = options
// firstName = "abc"
// lastName = "Smith"
NOTE: Capitalization matters
If working with an array, here is how you do it.
In this case, name is extracted from each object in the array, and given its own alias. Since the object might not exist = {} was also added.
const options = {
filters: [{
name: "abc",
value: "lots"
}]
}
const {filters:[{name : filter1 = "John"} = {}, {name : filter2 = "Smith"} = {}]} = options
// filter1 = "abc"
// filter2 = "Smith"
More Detailed Tutorial
Browser Support 92% July 2020

Categories