We Keep Coding

JS: Conventional structure for defining a callback function?

I've written a simple function which triggers a callback function once it is done printing out a certain string. Are there any caveats I should be aware of when structuring my callbacks the way I did?
Also, what would be the best approach if the original function were to be subjected to asynchronicity?
Code:
// Output via console
var message = "hello there";
function typeOut(message, callback = null, i = 0) {
var interval = setInterval(function() {
if (i < message.length) {
console.log(message.substring(0, i + 1));
i++;
} else {
clearInterval(interval);
callback();
}
}, 150);
//callback;
}
function postDialog() {
console.log('this is postdialog');
}
typeOut(message, postDialog);
Fiddle
Here

Two caveats:
Don't use null as a default value. This will inevitably throw an exception when called. Either use no default value, requiring the caller to provide a function, or use a function that does nothing (e.g. () => {}) for the default value.
The callback should always be the last parameter by convention. This makes calling a function with a long callback nicer, as all the arguments to the call are placed in the same spot, above the continuation.
Given that your i parameter is optional as well, this might not be trivial. Potential workarounds I can think of:
Don't make i a parameter at all - you're not using it anyway. Also in a real-world use case where you "animate" a DOM node it's trivial to prepend a constant prefix to the animated node.
Overload your function to have multiple signatures, and decide depending on the typeof the second parameter whether its i or callback. This does get tedious though.
And in general, the advise for writing new code in a modern code base is of course to use promises instead of callbacks! They will dispose of both the above problems:
function delay(ms) {
return new Promise(res => setTimeout(res, ms));
}
async function typeOut(message, i = 0) {
while (i < message.length) {
await delay(150);
i++;
console.log(message.slice(0, i));
}
}
var message = "hello there";
typeOut(message).then(function postDialog() {
console.log('this is postdialog');
});

Javascript long loops without workers

I require a long loop (long enough to make the browser hang if I used it naively). The contents of this loop requires other javascript files/libraries and I dont like the idea of concatonating them all into one file as this would make it harder to maintain. So (as far as I understand) this rules out web workers, Are there any other solutions out there?
I need the contents of the loop to run as fast as possible so any delay that can be measured in ms is unacceptable, any fixed delay at all would not be ideal.
I might be able to concatonate them all into a blob at runtime and then feed that into a web worker, I havn't really looked into this to far b/c it doesn't seem like a good solution.

You will have to use an asynchronous approach for this.
An example is to use a "dispatcher" function which invokes the work for each count and keep tracks of current count. It will make sure the next call is called asynchronous. When done the given callback is invoked.
Example
function startLoop(lFrom, lTo, workFunc, callback) {
var i = lFrom - 1;
(function loop() {
if (++i <= lTo) {
setTimeout(function() {
workFunc(i, loop); // start worker for this count
}, 9); // 9ms delay here - tweak as needed
}
else callback(); // done
})(); // self-invokes loop
}
Then in the worker function:
function worker(i, callback) {
// use i for what is needed, then
callback(); // will trigger next count
}
And of course, you can do batches instead of invoking a worker function for each count.
For block based approach for more "heavy" data, see also my answer here.
Simple demo below
startLoop(0, 20, worker, function() {alert("done")});
function startLoop(lFrom, lTo, workFunc, callback) {
var i = lFrom - 1;
(function loop() {
if (++i <= lTo) {
setTimeout(function() {
workFunc(i, loop); // start worker for this count
}, 9); // 9ms delay here - tweak as needed
}
else callback(); // done
})(); // self-invokes loop
}
function worker(i, callback) {
// use i for what is needed, then
document.querySelector("div").innerHTML += (i + "...");
callback(); // will trigger next count
}
<div></div>

Try to wrap loop body into setTimeout with zero time:
while (some_condition) {
setTimeout(function(){
// ... place your code here
}, 0);
}

Javascript Asynchronous Scoping Issue

I am trying to implement some flow control of async ajax calls. My project receives basically an array of values then completes an ajax call for each of them, process the results then run a function when complete.
I have a scoping issue in that the flow control function when initiated a 2nd time with a different array of work to complete its job reference value is overwritten. I have rewritten just the part I have trouble with eliminating all the other functions and posted it on jsfiddle.
http://jsfiddle.net/qanx9/
When the code is initiated the jobRunner function will console log the key to the globalObj where work is found. On the 3rd run of the function job2 is lost and everything is now referring to job1. I have tried putting everything inside this function in an anonymous function but that made no difference.
This is my first attempt at flow control and my project is actually in nodejs. There are libraries that do this for me but I am trying to get a good understanding on how this works.
// global used to track async flow control and store completed work
globalObj = {
job1: {
work: [0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,10],
results: []
},
job2: {
work: [11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20],
results: []
},
async: {
limit: 5,
running: 0
}
};
// flow control
function jobRunner(job) {
console.log(job)
g = globalObj.async;
j = globalObj[job];
while (g.running < g.limit && j.work.length > 0) {
var task = j.work.shift();
fakeAsyncAjax(task,function(result){
j.results.push(result);
g.running--;
if (j.work.length > 0) {
jobRunner(job);
} else if (g.running == 0) {
jobDone(job);
}
})
g.running++;
}
}
function jobDone(job) {
console.log(job+' complete..');
}
// instead of doing real ajax calls here ive done a basic simulation with a random delay, using setTimeout to make it async.
function fakeAsyncAjax(ref,completeFunc){
setTimeout(function(){
completeFunc(ref);
},Math.floor((Math.random() * 500) + 1))
}
// initate jobs
jobRunner('job1')
jobRunner('job2')

Javascript node.js callback function variable scope problems [duplicate]

This question already has answers here:
How do I return the response from an asynchronous call?
(41 answers)
Closed 8 years ago.
I am in the process of relearning Javascript and last week when writing this code for a university assignment I think that there is probably a much better way of executing this code
app.get('/member/all', function(req, res) {
connection.query('CALL GetAllMembers()', function(err,rows){
connection.query('CALL CountMembers()', function(err, allMembers){
console.log(err);
connection.query('CALL CountAllIndMembers()', function(err,indMembers){
console.log(err);
connection.query('CALL CountInactiveMembers()', function(err,inactiveMembers){
console.log(err);
connection.query('CALL CountAllMembersInGroups()', function(err,groupMembers){
console.log(err);
res.render('members', {members : rows[0], title : "All Members", groupMembers : groupMembers[0][0].AllGrpMembers,
inactiveMembers : inactiveMembers[0][0].AllInactiveMembers, indMembers : indMembers[0][0].AllIndMembers,
allMembers : allMembers[0][0].AllMembers, statistics : true});
});
});
});
});
});
});
});
When I was trying to declare variables under the app.get such as var allMembers... when the callback was executed I was unable to set allMembers = rowsFromTheCallback. It seemed that it was a local variable to that callback. I'm sure this is something to do with the variable scope and/or hoisting. Just wanted to ask you guys if there would be a better way to do this as even though this function works. It is very ugly to look at haha!
Thanks in advance
Jack

As far as scope goes, all the inner functions should be able to read and write to the outer variable unless it is shadowed by an inner variable declaration or function parameter.
The problem you are having might be related to the async-ness of the code. See this code:
function delay(n, cb){
setTimeout(function(){ bs(delay) }, delay);
}
function main(){
var allMembers = 17;
delay(500, function(){
console.log(allMembers); // This looks at the outer "allMembers"
allMembers = 18;
delay(200, function(allMembers){ // <-- SHADOW
console.log(allMembers); // This looks at the allMembers from "delay 200"'s callback
allMembers = 42;
});
delay(300, function(){
console.log(allMembers); //This is the outside "allMembers" again
});
});
return allMembers; // Still 17!
}
main();
main will return before the setTimeouts have even fired so its going to return the original value of that variable. In order to wait for the inner callbacks to run, the only way is to make main take a callback to signa when its done, instead of just returning.
function main(onResult){
delay(500, function(){
//...
onResult(allMembers);
});
// <-- no return value
});
main(function(allM){
console.log(allM);
});

See async library: https://github.com/caolan/async
async.series([
getAllMembers,
countMembers,
...
], function(err, results) {
// err contains an error if any of the functions fails. No more functions will be run.
// results is an array containing results of each function if all the functions executed without errors
}));
function getAllMembers(callback) {
connection.query('CALL CountMembers()', callback);
}
function countMembers(callback) {
...
}
If the execution order of the functions does not matter, async.parallel can be used instead of async.series.

There is power in using a library to handle and encapsulate "Continuation Passing Style" (CPS) interactions with your asynchronous calls. The following code isn't from a library, but I'm going to walk through it and use it as an example of one way to implement CPS.
Setting up a scope appropriate queue is the first step. This example uses about the most simple method for doing so:
var nextList = [];
After that we need a method to handle our first case, the need to queue tasks to be performed in the future. In this case I was focused on performing them in order so I named it next.
function next() {
var todo,
current,
task,
args = {};
if (arguments.length > 0) { // if called with parameters process them
// if parameters aren't in an array wrap them
if (!Array.isArray(arguments['0'])) {
todo = [arguments];
} else { // we were passed an array
todo = [];
arguments['0'].forEach(function (item) {
// for each item we were passed add it to todo
todo.push(item);
});
}
nextList = todo.concat(nextList);
// append the new items to the end of our list
}
if (nextList.length > 0) { // if there are still things to do
current = Array.prototype.slice.apply(nextList.shift());
task = current[0];
args = current.slice(1);
task.apply(null, args); // execute the next item in the list
}
}
This allows us to make calls like:
.map(function (filepath) {
tasks.push(
[
handleAsset,
{
'path': filepath,
}
]
);
});
tasks.push([done]);
next(tasks);
This will call handleAsset, which is async, once for each file, in order. This will allows you to take your code and change each of the nested calls into a separate function in the form:
function memberAll() {
app.get('/member/all', function(req, res) {
if (err) {
handleError(err, 'memberAll');
} else {
next(getAllMembers, 'parameters to that call if needed');
}
});
}
where handleError is a common error handler, and the next call allows you to pass on relevant parameters to the next function that is needed. Importantly in the success side of the if statement you could either:
conditionally call one of several functions
call next with an array of calls to make, for instance if you had functions for processFolder and processFile you could expect that processing a folder might involve processing other folders and files and that the number would vary
do nothing except call next() with no parameters and end the current branch
Embellishments can include writing a clean function for emptying the nextList, adding items to nextList without calling an item from the list, etc. The alternative at this point is to either use an existing library for this or to continue writing your own.

Javascript - synchronizing after asynchronous calls

I have a Javascript object that requires 2 calls out to an external server to build its contents and do anything meaningful. The object is built such that instantiating an instance of it will automatically make these 2 calls. The 2 calls share a common callback function that operates on the returned data and then calls another method. The problem is that the next method should not be called until both methods return. Here is the code as I have implemented it currently:
foo.bar.Object = function() {
this.currentCallbacks = 0;
this.expectedCallbacks = 2;
this.function1 = function() {
// do stuff
var me = this;
foo.bar.sendRequest(new RequestObject, function(resp) {
me.commonCallback(resp);
});
};
this.function2 = function() {
// do stuff
var me = this;
foo.bar.sendRequest(new RequestObject, function(resp) {
me.commonCallback(resp);
});
};
this.commonCallback = function(resp) {
this.currentCallbacks++;
// do stuff
if (this.currentCallbacks == this.expectedCallbacks) {
// call new method
}
};
this.function1();
this.function2();
}
As you can see, I am forcing the object to continue after both calls have returned using a simple counter to validate they have both returned. This works but seems like a really poor implementation. I have only worked with Javascript for a few weeks now and am wondering if there is a better method for doing the same thing that I have yet to stumble upon.
Thanks for any and all help.

Unless you're willing to serialize the AJAX there is no other way that I can think of to do what you're proposing. That being said, I think what you have is fairly good, but you might want to clean up the structure a bit to not litter the object you're creating with initialization data.
Here is a function that might help you:
function gate(fn, number_of_calls_before_opening) {
return function() {
arguments.callee._call_count = (arguments.callee._call_count || 0) + 1;
if (arguments.callee._call_count >= number_of_calls_before_opening)
fn.apply(null, arguments);
};
}
This function is what's known as a higher-order function - a function that takes functions as arguments. This particular function returns a function that calls the passed function when it has been called number_of_calls_before_opening times. For example:
var f = gate(function(arg) { alert(arg); }, 2);
f('hello');
f('world'); // An alert will popup for this call.
You could make use of this as your callback method:
foo.bar = function() {
var callback = gate(this.method, 2);
sendAjax(new Request(), callback);
sendAjax(new Request(), callback);
}
The second callback, whichever it is will ensure that method is called. But this leads to another problem: the gate function calls the passed function without any context, meaning this will refer to the global object, not the object that you are constructing. There are several ways to get around this: You can either close-over this by aliasing it to me or self. Or you can create another higher order function that does just that.
Here's what the first case would look like:
foo.bar = function() {
var me = this;
var callback = gate(function(a,b,c) { me.method(a,b,c); }, 2);
sendAjax(new Request(), callback);
sendAjax(new Request(), callback);
}
In the latter case, the other higher order function would be something like the following:
function bind_context(context, fn) {
return function() {
return fn.apply(context, arguments);
};
}
This function returns a function that calls the passed function in the passed context. An example of it would be as follows:
var obj = {};
var func = function(name) { this.name = name; };
var method = bind_context(obj, func);
method('Your Name!');
alert(obj.name); // Your Name!
To put it in perspective, your code would look as follows:
foo.bar = function() {
var callback = gate(bind_context(this, this.method), 2);
sendAjax(new Request(), callback);
sendAjax(new Request(), callback);
}
In any case, once you've made these refactorings you will have cleared up the object being constructed of all its members that are only needed for initialization.

I can add that Underscore.js has a nice little helper for this:
Creates a version of the function that will only be run after first
being called count times. Useful for grouping asynchronous responses,
where you want to be sure that all the async calls have finished,
before proceeding.
_.after(count, function)
The code for _after (as-of version 1.5.0):
_.after = function(times, func) {
return function() {
if (--times < 1) {
return func.apply(this, arguments);
}
};
};
The license info (as-of version 1.5.0)

There is barely another way than to have this counter. Another option would be to use an object {} and add a key for every request and remove it if finished. This way you would know immediately which has returned. But the solution stays the same.
You can change the code a little bit. If it is like in your example that you only need to call another function inside of commonCallback (I called it otherFunction) than you don't need the commonCallback. In order to save the context you did use closures already. Instead of
foo.bar.sendRequest(new RequestObject, function(resp) {
me.commonCallback(resp);
});
you could do it this way
foo.bar.sendRequest(new RequestObject, function(resp) {
--me.expectedCallbacks || me.otherFunction(resp);
});

That's some good stuff Mr. Kyle.
To put it a bit simpler, I usually use a Start and a Done function.
-The Start function takes a list of functions that will be executed.
-The Done function gets called by the callbacks of your functions that you passed to the start method.
-Additionally, you can pass a function, or list of functions to the done method that will be executed when the last callback completes.
The declarations look like this.
var PendingRequests = 0;
function Start(Requests) {
PendingRequests = Requests.length;
for (var i = 0; i < Requests.length; i++)
Requests[i]();
};
//Called when async responses complete.
function Done(CompletedEvents) {
PendingRequests--;
if (PendingRequests == 0) {
for (var i = 0; i < CompletedEvents.length; i++)
CompletedEvents[i]();
}
}
Here's a simple example using the google maps api.
//Variables
var originAddress = "*Some address/zip code here*"; //Location A
var formattedAddress; //Formatted address of Location B
var distance; //Distance between A and B
var location; //Location B
//This is the start function above. Passing an array of two functions defined below.
Start(new Array(GetPlaceDetails, GetDistances));
//This function makes a request to get detailed information on a place.
//Then callsback with the **GetPlaceDetailsComplete** function
function GetPlaceDetails() {
var request = {
reference: location.reference //Google maps reference id
};
var PlacesService = new google.maps.places.PlacesService(Map);
PlacesService.getDetails(request, GetPlaceDetailsComplete);
}
function GetPlaceDetailsComplete(place, status) {
if (status == google.maps.places.PlacesServiceStatus.OK) {
formattedAddress = place.formatted_address;
Done(new Array(PrintDetails));
}
}
function GetDistances() {
distService = new google.maps.DistanceMatrixService();
distService.getDistanceMatrix(
{
origins: originAddress,
destinations: [location.geometry.location], //Location contains lat and lng
travelMode: google.maps.TravelMode.DRIVING,
unitSystem: google.maps.UnitSystem.IMPERIAL,
avoidHighways: false,
avoidTolls: false
}, GetDistancesComplete);
}
function GetDistancesComplete(results, status) {
if (status == google.maps.DistanceMatrixStatus.OK) {
distance = results[0].distance.text;
Done(new Array(PrintDetails));
}
}
function PrintDetails() {
alert(*Whatever you feel like printing.*);
}
So in a nutshell, what we're doing here is
-Passing an array of functions to the Start function
-The Start function calls the functions in the array and sets the number of PendingRequests
-In the callbacks for our pending requests, we call the Done function
-The Done function takes an array of functions
-The Done function decrements the PendingRequests counter
-If their are no more pending requests, we call the functions passed to the Done function
That's a simple, but practicle example of sychronizing web calls. I tried to use an example of something that's widely used, so I went with the Google maps api. I hope someone finds this useful.

Another way would be to have a sync point thanks to a timer. It is not beautiful, but it has the advantage of not having to add the call to the next function inside the callback.
Here the function execute_jobs is the entry point. it take a list of data to execute simultaneously. It first sets the number of jobs to wait to the size of the list. Then it set a timer to test for the end condition (the number falling down to 0). And finally it sends a job for each data. Each job decrease the number of awaited jobs by one.
It would look like something like that:
var g_numJobs = 0;
function async_task(data) {
//
// ... execute the task on the data ...
//
// Decrease the number of jobs left to execute.
--g_numJobs;
}
function execute_jobs(list) {
// Set the number of jobs we want to wait for.
g_numJobs = list.length;
// Set the timer (test every 50ms).
var timer = setInterval(function() {
if(g_numJobs == 0) {
clearInterval(timer);
do_next_action();
}
}, 50);
// Send the jobs.
for(var i = 0; i < list.length; ++i) {
async_task(list[i]));
}
}
To improve this code you can do a Job and JobList classes. The Job would execute a callback and decrease the number of pending jobs, while the JobList would aggregate the timer and call the callback to the next action once the jobs are finished.

I shared the same frustration. As I chained more asynchronous calls, it became a callback hell. So, I came up with my own solution. I'm sure there are similar solutions out there, but I wanted to create something very simple and easy to use. Asynq is a script that I wrote to chain asynchronous tasks. So to run f2 after f1, you can do:
asynq.run(f1, f2)
You can chain as many functions as you want. You can also specify parameters or run a series of tasks on elements in an array too. I hope this library can solve your issues or similar issues others are having.