This question already has answers here:
Console access to Javascript variables local to the $(document).ready function
(8 answers)
Closed 6 years ago.
I'm using a shopping cart api to build an ecommerce website. The creators made an sdk and then you have to make your own .js file for some other functions.
While debugging I would insert a console.log(etc..) anywhere in my .js file so that I could debug object options and etc..
But I would like to be able to use the sdk as a live tool, so instead of having to edit my .js file with new console.log() lines, I'd rather just be able to type object.color_code and have the console output that string for the object color code. At the moment though it just gives me uncaught reference error, object is not defined.
I think this is because my custom .js file has all of it's script inside a $(function() { EVERYTHING }); SO, when I try to call anything in EVERYTHING from the console it says it's undefined, but if I just used console.log inside EVERYTHING it would work. So is there a way I can get around this?
Feel free to explain why it isn't working but I'd like a way to enable this, don't tell me there isn't a way, even if I have to prefix what I want with the .js file it's coming from each time, I don't mind
You were correct in that all of your variables inside the function are only being defined locally, and thus can't be accessed via the console. However, in Javascript there are at least two options for setting global variables from inside functions; If you use these to declare a variable you want to access from outside the function, it will work:
Assign a value to an undeclared variable: varname=value;
Assign the variable to the window object: window.varname=value; or window['varname']=value;
A possible workaround is to expose the object(s) that you want to debug in the global scope:
(function() {
var privateStuff = { foo: 'bar' };
// make privateStuff public for debugging purposes
window['debugObject'] = privateStuff;
})();
document.write(debugObject.foo);
If you want to expose several objects with rather common names that are likely to collide with existing ones, make sure to expose them within an object with an uncommon name rather than directly:
(function() {
var x = { str: 'this is' },
y = { str: 'a test' };
window['debugObject'] = {
x: x,
y: y
};
})();
document.write(debugObject.x.str + ' ' + debugObject.y.str);
If you're happy to change the source file then you could export whatever you want to access from EVERYTHING as a global.
$(function() {
//EVERYTHING
...
window.Ireply = window.Ireply || {};
window.Ireply.object = object;
...
});
console.log(Ireply.object); // some object
You can change a declaration like
$(function(){
var cart = {};
})
To
var cart;
$(function(){
cart = {}
})
Or
$(function(){
var cart = {};
window.cart = cart;
})
But you will want to avoid polluting global namespace. You will also want to be careful about using globals inside callbacks or loops where you can run into unexpected behaviors since local variables scope is often important to be kept local
Related
Thus far I've worked only with relatively small projects (and mostly alone), but this time I have to collaborate with other programmers... basically because of that I must plan the structure of the website very carefully for the avoidance of spending hours debugging the code.
At this point I suppose doing that in the following manner. I divide my code in modules and store each module in a separate file inside an object (or a function) with a made-up name (lzheA, lzheB, lzheC etc.) to avoid conflicts whether an object with the same name was used in an another piece of code. When the document is loaded, I declare a variable (an object) that I use as a main namespace of the application. Properties of the object are the modules I defined before.
// file BI.lib.js
var lzheA = {
foo: function() {
},
bar: function() {
},
}
// file BI.init.js
function lzheK() {
BI.loadPage();
}
// file BI.loadPage.js
function lzheC() {
var result = document.getElementById('result');
result.innerHTML = "that worked";
}
// and so on
var lzheA,lzheB,lzheD,lzheE,lzheF,lzheG,lzheH,lzheI,lzheJ;
// doing the following when the document is loaded
var BI = {
lib: lzheA,
menu: lzheB,
loadPage: lzheC,
customScripts: lzheD,
_index: lzheE,
_briefs: lzheF,
_shop: lzheG,
_cases: lzheH,
_blog: lzheI,
_contacts: lzheJ,
init: lzheK,
}
BI.init();
https://jsfiddle.net/vwc2og57/2/
The question... is this way of structuring worth living or did I miss something because of lack of experience? Would the made-up names of the modules confuse you regardless of the fact that each one used only twice - while declaring the variable and assigning it to a property?
I consider the namespaces a good option when you want to modularize applications in Javascript. But I declare them in a different way
var myModule = myModule || {}; // This will allow to use the module in other places, declaring more than one specificComponent in other js file for example
myModule.specificComponent = (function(){
// Private things
var myVar = {};
var init = function() {
// Code
};
return {
init: init // Public Stuff
};
})();
If you want to call the init method, you would call it like this
myModule.specificComponent.init();
With this approach, i guarantee that the module will not be overwritten by another declaration in another place, and also I can declare internal components into my namespaces.
Also, the trick of just exposing what you want inside the return block, will make your component safer and you will be encapsulating your code in a pretty way.
Hope it helps
I have a problem. I have defined some global variables and namespaced it into an object called "app".
Example:
window.app : {
foo : null,
bar : null,
}
Well, the idea is that I want to be able to modify those variables from any module by calling app.foo = "baz" or app.bar = "baz", but I don't want the user to be able to modify those variables from the browser console (element inspector).
Is it possible?
PD: Well, I have a Backbone.js collection which is sinchronized with the server. I don't want the user to be able to modify that collection with the console
No. The browser is the user's domain. They have the possibility to modify your scripts and inject their own functionality in various ways (through the console or browser plug-ins). That's one of the reasons why you should never blindly trust user input on the server side.
They could even manually forge a complete request, tricking your server into thinking that your JavaScript code made that request.
If you want these values to be secure, you need to keep them on the server. You can send them to the client, of course, as long as you keep a possibility to validate the values against those on the server.
The only way to make the variables not (easily) modifiable by a user is to remove them from global scope - something like
!function() {
foo = null;
bar = null;
}()
You'll need to redesign the way your modules interact with each other to accomplish this. An MVC Framework like Angular.js will help.
You should never rely on this as a security mechanism, though - the browser is fully in the user's control.
Still for them who are searching solution to this problem, use const modifier while assigning variable instead of var. Now try to change value of variable from browser console. It will throw error Uncaught TypeError: Assignment to constant variable that will prevent your data from being modified.
A possible way to avoid to (easily) modify javascript variables from the browser console is to either use the get operator (ECMAScript 5) or a getter-function.
To make it possible to define "private" variables, an anonymous function defines the variables in the local scope, so that it is not globally available. (as mentioned in joews' answer)
As mentioned before, this does not make it impossible to manipulate the variables.
Via get operator:
window.app = (function () {
var _foo = 123; // private variable
return {
get foo () { return _foo; }
};
}());
// --- accessing app from the console ---
// app.foo is readable from console, but not modifiable
console.log(app.foo);
app.foo = 234;
console.log(app.foo); // 123
// However, app.foo can still be modified via Object.defineProperty or
// removed with the delete operator
Via getter-function (older browsers, e.g IE < 9):
window.app = (function () {
var _foo = 123; // private variable
return {
foo: function() { return _foo; }
};
}());
// --- accessing app from the console ---
console.log(app.foo()); // 123
// However, the foo function can still be overwritten.
// But at least, the internal _foo variable is unaffected.
app.foo = function () { return 234; }
I currently have a Web Application that runs off a global Javascript-based API, and it is initialized like this:
var Api = {
someVar: "test",
someFunction: function() {
return "foo";
}
}
This API is shared across many "Widgets" that live in the Web Application, and they should all run off this single Api instance so they can pass data to each other.
AJAX is currently used to load these Widgets, for example in widgets/mywidget.html, and it's placed in, say, <div id='widget_<random number>'>...</div>
Certain other parts of the code may choose to add more functionality to Api, and it's currently done like this:
Api.myExtension = {
myNewFunction: function() {
return "bar";
}
}
However, some issues arise from this kind of usage:
Problem One: What if one Widget (these may be provided by third-parties) decides to hide some code within, and does something similar to Api = {}, destroying the global Api var everything lives on, and breaking the whole Application? Is it possible to protect this Api variable from being overwritten from outside? Only "extending" is allowed (adding new things), but "removing/changing" is not allowed. i.e.:
Api.foo = { test: "bar" } // allowed
Api.someVar = "changing the existing someVar"; // not allowed
The following code is located "inside" Api, for example:
var Api = {
Debug: {
Messages = new Array,
Write: function() {
Api.Debug.Messages.push("test"); // allowed
}
}
}
Api.Debug.Messages.push("test 2"); // not allowed
Probable Solutions I've Thought Of:
Suppose we simply use frames to resolve this issue. The Apis provided are now separate from each other. However, there's additional overhead when loading Api again and again if I have many Widgets running, and they can no longer communicate with the "Host" of the widgets (the page where frames reside in), for example, I may want to tell the host to show a notification: Api.Notify.Show("Test"), but it cannot do so because this Api is completely independent from other instances, and it cannot communicate with the "Host"
Using something like a "getter" and "setter" function for the Api to be read and written. I'm unsure on how to implement this, so any help on directions on how to implement this is welcome!
A mixture of 1/2?
There's no good way to prevent having a "third party" widget overwrite the a global variable. Generally it is the responsibility of whoever is putting together the final application to ensure that whatever JavaScripts they are using aren't littering the global namespace and conflicting. The best thing you can do in that direction is give your "Api" a nice, unique name.
What I think can help you a lot is something like the "revealing pattern", which would be a way of doing the "getters and setters" you mentioned, plus more if you needed it.
A simple, useless example would be like the following:
var Api = (function () {
// private variable
var myArray = [];
return {
addItem: function (newItem) {
myArray.push(newItem);
},
printItems: function () {
console.log("lots if items");
}
};
})();
Api.addItem("Hello, world");
Api.extensionValue = 5;
I think you should make a clear delineation of what is shared, or "singleton" data, and keep those items private, as with myArray in my example.
Make it a constant:
const Api = "hi";
Api = 0;
alert(Api); //"hi"
Take a look at
Object.freeze
More info here
Here is a code example from Mozilla's page:
var obj = {
prop: function (){},
foo: "bar"
};
// New properties may be added, existing properties may be changed or removed
obj.foo = "baz";
obj.lumpy = "woof";
delete obj.prop;
var o = Object.freeze(obj);
assert(Object.isFrozen(obj) === true);
// Now any changes will fail
obj.foo = "quux"; // silently does nothing
obj.quaxxor = "the friendly duck"; // silently doesn't add the property
// ...and in strict mode such attempts will throw TypeErrors
function fail(){
"use strict";
obj.foo = "sparky"; // throws a TypeError
delete obj.quaxxor; // throws a TypeError
obj.sparky = "arf"; // throws a TypeError
}
fail();
// Attempted changes through Object.defineProperty will also throw
Object.defineProperty(obj, "ohai", { value: 17 }); // throws a TypeError
Object.defineProperty(obj, "foo", { value: "eit" }); // throws a TypeError
However browser support is still partial
EDIT: see Kernel James's answer, it's more relevant to your question (freeze will protect the object, but not protect reassigning it. however const will) same issue with limited browser support though.
The only way (at least that I can think of) to protect your global variable is to prevent the Widgets from having a direct access to it. This can be achieved by using frames functions, as you suggested. You should create an object that contains all the functions that the Widgets should be able to use, and pass such to each Widget. For example:
var Api = {
widgetApi = {
someFunction: function(){
// ...
}
},
addWidget:function(){
var temp = this.widgetApi.constructor();
for(var key in this.widgetApi)
temp[key] = clone(this.widgetApi[key]);
return temp;
}
// Include other variables that Widgets can't use
}
This way, the Widgets could execute functions and communicate with the host or global variable Api. To set variables, the Widget would be editing its private object, rather than the global one. For every frame (that represents a Widget), you must initialize or create a copy of the widgetApi object, and probably store it inside an array, in such a way that an instance of a Widget is stored in the main Api object.
For example, given <iframe id="widget"></iframe>
You would do the following:
var widget = document.getElementById("widget");
widget.contentWindow.Api = Api.addWidget();
widget.contentWindow.parent = null;
widget.contentWindow.top = null;
Additionally, in every frame you would need to set the parent and top variables to null so that the Widgets wouldn't be able to access the data of the main frame. I haven't tested this method in a while, so there might be ways to get around setting those variables to null.
My application is accessing a third party external JavaScript file that I cannot alter.
Within the file is an object defined similarly to as follows:
object_1 = (function(){
var object_1_var = 'object_1_var_value';
return {
obj_1_func: function() {
console.log(object_1_var);
}
}
})(window);
I need to be able access the object_1_var within the object, but I'm struggling to access it.
object_1.v // returns undefined
object_1.obj_1_func() // returns the value via console, but I need to assign it to a var.
I have tried extending the object using as follows: (Using jQuerys $.extend())
object_2 = (function(){
return {
obj_2_func: function() {
return object_1_var;
}
}
})(window);
$.extend(object_1, object_2);
var my_var = object_1.obj_2_func(); // returns 'Uncaught ReferenceError: object_1_var is not defined'
What can I do to be able to access object_1_var?
You will not be able to access the variable. It happens to be a private member. Private members of an object can be accessed only by its member functions.
Read this.
object_1_var is a lexically scoped local variable.
That means that it can't be accessed by extending object_1 outside of its original definition.
The only way it can be accessed is by adding functions within the original lexical scope in which it was declared:
object_1 = (function(){
var object_1_var = 'object_1_var_value';
return {
obj_1_func: function() {
console.log(object_1_var);
}
var_1: function(x) {
if (typeof x !== 'undefined') {
object_1_var = x;
} else {
return object_1_var;
}
}
}
})(window);
but since you can't modify object_1, you're out of luck, I'm afraid!
Make it public, like this:
object_1 = (function(){
var object_1_var = 'object_1_var_value';
return {
obj_1_func: function() {
console.log(object_1_var);
},
object_1_var: object_1_var
}
})(window);
EDIT
If unable to edit the javascript (such as in a third party library - sorry for omission) then you will not be able to have access to object_1_var as it's scope is local to the closure object_1.
What you are trying to accomplish is impossible in JS.
With the construction of object_1 the variable goes out of scope of that method. The reason why the logging function can access the variable is what we call 'a closure'.
Sadly, object_1_var isn't accessible in this example. The variable is defined as local to within that particular function - the only reason that the other functions can see it is because they are also defined within that function. This "closure scoping" is an interesting feature in JavaScript that you don't see very often elsewhere, but is the only real way of defining "private" variables in JavaScript Objects.
Hope that helps!
In a worst case scenario, in the past I've worked around this sort of issue by effectively overwriting the definition of an object that was previously defined elsewhere - mainly in Greasemonkey scripts - but I wouldn't condone this for production uses!
The trick here is to just copy the entire piece of script into your own. It's ugly as hell, but it might just work! (YMMV)
I try to load some external .js files, and have some irresolvable namespace conflicts.
I had the idea of loading some of the files in their own context somehow, replacing the "this" from pointing at the window object to some custom namespace.
example:
first.js:
name = "first";
second.js:
name = "second";
It seems to me that this kind of trick can be very useful. Is it possible at all?
EDIT
seems that replacing "this" does not begin to solve the problem, as it is not the default context for identifier resolution in javascript. this is my test code:
var first = {};
var second = {};
(function(){name = "first";}).call(first);
(function(){name = "second";}).call(second);
document.write('name= '+name+' <br/>\n'); //prints "second"
document.write('first.name= '+first.name+' <br/>\n'); //prints "undefined"
document.write('second.name= '+second.name+' <br/>\n'); //prints "undefined
any ideas?
RESOLUTION
It is not possible. I ended up wiser than I was this morning, and I gave it up.
I recommend these enlightening reading materials for anyone with a similar problem that might want to take a crack at it:
http://jibbering.com/faq/notes/closures/
http://softwareas.com/cross-domain-communication-with-iframes
One idea I've had for doing it without needing modifications to your external JavaScript file is getting the contents of the JavaScript file in an AJAXy way (up to you how you do that) and then put it all in a function using the new Function(code) way, then initialise that with new:
surrogateWindow = new new Function(jsCode)();
Then surrogateWindow is the this of that code. I think that that idea should work.
I'm not clear on your reason for doing this; what are you using this for, exactly?
Wrapping the contents of your second.js in an anonymous function will prevent variables in that file from conflicting with global variables. If you really must have a this set to a particular object that isn't the global object, you could do something like
var differentThis = {};
(function() {
// Contents of second.js go here
}).call(differentThis);
UPDATE
You can't do what you want. You seem to want to access the Variable object, which is the object to which a property is added when you declare a variable in JavaScript. In global code, the Variable object is the global object, so you can access it; within a function this is a property of the execution context that there is no way to access directly.
Even though this is an old question, this answer may still be relevant for some:
When a js file is loaded it automatically gets the window's context. That is not possible to change.
However, if you are trying to avoid conflicts between libraries that you are loading, and you don't have control over those libs, and they don't have a built-in "no-conflict" mechanism, then there is a nice trick -
you can load those into a source-less iframe.
This will make their context to be the window of the iframe, and you will still be able to access the iframe since there is no cross-domain issue here.
You can see this library as an example for use of this technique.
You can load your file in an iframe, the file is not a .js but an HTML file, like:
<html>
<body>
<script>
var $ = parent.$, // you can share objects with the parent, eg: jQuery
localObject = { // your local object definition
name: 'first',
showName: function(){
$('div.name').html( this.name );
}
};
//assign the local object to the custom namespace
parent.customNamespace.object1 = localObject;
</script>
</body>
</html>
The trick is to use parent. to get the javascript objects available in the parent page.
For the code you've written, I think you're misunderstanding some of the way classes work in JavaScript. In Java you can drop the this., but in JavaScript you can't. You'll always need to have this. there. So then your code becomes:
var first = {};
var second = {};
(function(){this.name = "first";}).call(first);
(function(){this.name = "second";}).call(second);
document.write('name= '+name+' <br/>\n'); //prints "undefined"
document.write('first.name= '+first.name+' <br/>\n'); //prints "first"
document.write('second.name= '+second.name+' <br/>\n'); //prints "second"
It would also be good to do it in a more normal class way. I'm not sure exactly what your situation is as I can't see all your code so you might be already doing it this way.
function Something(name) {
this.name = name;
}
var first = new Something("first");
var second = new Something("second");
document.write('name= '+name+' <br/>\n'); //prints "undefined"
document.write('first.name= '+first.name+' <br/>\n'); //prints "first"
document.write('second.name= '+second.name+' <br/>\n'); //prints "second"
Well you could wrap the contents of the js files with something like this:
var externalInterfaceForYourObject = (function(){
//code that defines your object
//this should refer to the current anonymous function, and not the window object
return this;
})();