We Keep Coding

Running functions in sync in node.js

I want to run func2 run only after func1 has finished.
{
func1();
func2();//
}
But when func1() starts, func2() does not wait for func1() to get finished. func2() run simultaneously with func1(), which causes run time error, because func2() need some input from func1().
I also tried using async module, but got no success.
Edit: I run the function check(), which call two functions prompt() and copyProject(). copyProject() should run only after prompt() function has finished, but it start executing simultaneously.
var check = function check (){
async.series([
function(callback){
prompt();
callback(null);
},
function(callback){
copyProject();
callback(null);
}
]);
};
var prompt = function prompt(){
var prompts = [{
name: "projectName",
message: "What is the name of your project?"
},{
name: "authorName",
message: "What is your name?",
}];
inquirer.prompt(prompts, function( answers ) {
for (var key in answers) {
if (answers.hasOwnProperty(key)) {
console.log(key + " -> " + answers[key]);
infoToRender[key] = answers[key]
}
}
});
};
var copyProject = function copyProject (){
// code to copy some files from one location to another based on input from prompt function
};

Your function prompt is itself an asynchronous function: The call to inquirer.prompts causes the function to wait and this makes it asynchronous. Since your prompt function does not use a callback, the async module can not know when prompt has finished: In contrast, it runs prompt and this function immediately returns. Hence async right afterwards runs copyProject.
What you need to do to solve this issue is to introduce a callback function in prompt that async "waits" for. So basically something like this:
var prompt = function (callback) {
// Do your stuff here...
inquirer.prompt(prompts, function (answers) {
// Your for loop here...
callback(null);
});
};
Then, within async you need to do:
async.series([
function (callback) {
prompt(callback);
},
function (callback) {
copyProject();
callback(null);
}
]);
Then copyProject is only run when prompt has been completed. Please note that async.series will not wait for copyProject to finish, in case this is an asynchronous function, as again, it does not take a callback. So same pattern applies here.

Function with async operation that works for script-tag and as standalone

Let's say I have a function in a file:
foo.js:
(function(){
return {
loadStuff: function(callback){
setTimeout(function() { callback() }, 2000)
}
}
})()
I have to run loadStuff in two different ways:
first: when I get the file loaded by javascript engine itself (let's say via XHR and eval), then I can call it passing a callback (that's already possible)
second: when it's loaded in a script tag, it still should call loadStuff automatically, although without a callback this time
How should I change the code to make loadStuff work both ways? I don't want to call loadStuff twice though: so for the first case I want to call it with callback, not like it would call it the first time function loaded (without callback) and then again with callback. I just need it to run loadStuff once, with callback.
So.
when <script src='foo.js' /> it should call loadStuff automatically
when the function is string and I do this:
fn = eval(fnStr)
fn.loadStuff(function(){
console.log("stuff loaded")
})
It should call loadStuff only once

Try
foo.js:
(function(){
var called = false,
loadStuff = function(callback){
called = true;
setTimeout(function() { callback && callback() }, 2000)
};
setTimeout(function(){!called && loadStuff();}, 13); //autolaunch if needed
return {
loadStuff: loadStuff
}
})()

Will calling async functions within different functions still cause async behavior?

Let's say I have multiple functions func1, func2, func3, etc.....
And they all contain an AJAX/async function within them:
function funcX(){
// some ajax request
}
If in a main function I am calling func1, func2, func3 sequentially like so:
$(document).ready(function(){
func1();
func2();
func3();
...
}
Will each ajax/async function's call be certain to execute in the order of their parent functions? At first I thought they might be, but the behavior of my program seems to be suggesting otherwise...
If not, is there a good (hopefully simple?) alternative to having a long chain of callbacks?

Will each ajax/async function's call be certain to execute in the order of their parent functions?
They should execute in order, but their internal callbacks can be called in any order.
If not, is there a good (hopefully simple?) alternative to having a long chain of callbacks?
You could use a promise, and execute the next function when the promise has been resolved.
This example uses jQuery...
var fn1 = function () {
var d = $.Deferred();
setTimeout(function () {
$("body").text("Callback 1 done.") && d.resolve();
}, Math.random() * 1300 + 800);
return d.promise();
};
var fn2 = function () {
var d = $.Deferred();
setTimeout(function () {
$("body").text("Callback 2 done.") && d.resolve();
}, 500);
return d.promise();
};
$.when(fn1(), fn2()).then(function () {
setTimeout(function () {
$("body").text("All done.");
}, 300);
});
jsFiddle.
We use $.when() and pass the invoked functions we want to execute to it. We then use then() to show a final message (I placed a setTimeout() here so you can see the last resolved function's message in the document).
Each of these functions have their own deferred object which return the promise. A setTimeout() mocks an XHR for example's sake. When this callback is executed, we resolve the deferred object.
Once both have been deferred, we reach the callback for then().

To serialize tasks, I've written a helper function, which can also be found in my earlier answer:
function serializeTasks(arr, fn, done)
{
var current = 0;
fn(function iterate() {
if (++current < arr.length) {
fn(iterate, arr[current]);
} else {
done();
}
}, arr[current]);
}
It takes an array of values (in your case those are actually functions), a loop function and a completion handler. Below is the loop function:
function loopFn(nextTask, fn)
{
fn(nextTask);
}
It accepts an intermediate completion function as the first argument and each element of the aforementioned array.
To set everything in motion:
serializeTasks([func1, func2, func3], loopFn, function() {
console.log('all done');
});
Your functions are called with a single argument which should be passed to the AJAX success callback, e.g.
func1(nextTask)
{
$.ajax({
...,
success: nextTask
});
}

The order in which the asynch results are returned is not deterministic, and may wary every time.
func2 might complete before func1 etc
It is important to ensure correct order of execution. One pattern is to call the next function in the success callback of the prior function
Ex:
$.get("/someUrl",function(){
$.get("/nextAjaxCall", function(){
.....
});
});
If the dependency chain is very simple, I don't think it's necessary to introduce a framework to handle this

Or look at async library and it's awesomeness !
async

How can I create an Asynchronous function in Javascript?

Check out this code :
Link
<span>Moving</span>
$('#link').click(function () {
console.log("Enter");
$('#link').animate({ width: 200 }, 2000, function() {
console.log("finished");
});
console.log("Exit");
});
As you can see in the console, the "animate" function is asynchronous, and it "fork"s the flow of the event handler block code. In fact :
$('#link').click(function () {
console.log("Enter");
asyncFunct();
console.log("Exit");
});
function asyncFunct() {
console.log("finished");
}
follow the flow of the block code!
If I wish to create my function asyncFunct() { } with this behaviour, how can I do it with javascript/jquery? I think there is a strategy without the use of setTimeout()
​

You cannot make a truly custom asynchronous function. You'll eventually have to leverage on a technology provided natively, such as:
setInterval
setTimeout
requestAnimationFrame
XMLHttpRequest
WebSocket
Worker
Some HTML5 APIs such as the File API, Web Database API
Technologies that support onload
... many others
In fact, for the animation jQuery uses setInterval.

You can use a timer:
setTimeout( yourFn, 0 );
(where yourFn is a reference to your function)
or, with Lodash:
_.defer( yourFn );
Defers invoking the func until the current call stack has cleared. Any additional arguments are provided to func when it's invoked.

here you have simple solution (other write about it)
http://www.benlesh.com/2012/05/calling-javascript-function.html
And here you have above ready solution:
function async(your_function, callback) {
setTimeout(function() {
your_function();
if (callback) {callback();}
}, 0);
}
TEST 1 (may output '1 x 2 3' or '1 2 x 3' or '1 2 3 x'):
console.log(1);
async(function() {console.log('x')}, null);
console.log(2);
console.log(3);
TEST 2 (will always output 'x 1'):
async(function() {console.log('x');}, function() {console.log(1);});
This function is executed with timeout 0 - it will simulate asynchronous task

Here is a function that takes in another function and outputs a version that runs async.
var async = function (func) {
return function () {
var args = arguments;
setTimeout(function () {
func.apply(this, args);
}, 0);
};
};
It is used as a simple way to make an async function:
var anyncFunction = async(function (callback) {
doSomething();
callback();
});
This is different from #fider's answer because the function itself has its own structure (no callback added on, it's already in the function) and also because it creates a new function that can be used.

Edit: I totally misunderstood the question. In the browser, I would use setTimeout. If it was important that it ran in another thread, I would use Web Workers.

Late, but to show an easy solution using promises after their introduction in ES6, it handles asynchronous calls a lot easier:
You set the asynchronous code in a new promise:
var asyncFunct = new Promise(function(resolve, reject) {
$('#link').animate({ width: 200 }, 2000, function() {
console.log("finished");
resolve();
});
});
Note to set resolve() when async call finishes.
Then you add the code that you want to run after async call finishes inside .then() of the promise:
asyncFunct.then((result) => {
console.log("Exit");
});
Here is a snippet of it:
$('#link').click(function () {
console.log("Enter");
var asyncFunct = new Promise(function(resolve, reject) {
$('#link').animate({ width: 200 }, 2000, function() {
console.log("finished");
resolve();
});
});
asyncFunct.then((result) => {
console.log("Exit");
});
});
<script src="https://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/2.1.1/jquery.min.js"></script>
Link
<span>Moving</span>
or JSFiddle

This page walks you through the basics of creating an async javascript function.
Since ES2017, asynchronous javacript functions are much easier to write. You should also read more on Promises.

If you want to use Parameters and regulate the maximum number of async functions you can use a simple async worker I've build:
var BackgroundWorker = function(maxTasks) {
this.maxTasks = maxTasks || 100;
this.runningTasks = 0;
this.taskQueue = [];
};
/* runs an async task */
BackgroundWorker.prototype.runTask = function(task, delay, params) {
var self = this;
if(self.runningTasks >= self.maxTasks) {
self.taskQueue.push({ task: task, delay: delay, params: params});
} else {
self.runningTasks += 1;
var runnable = function(params) {
try {
task(params);
} catch(err) {
console.log(err);
}
self.taskCompleted();
}
// this approach uses current standards:
setTimeout(runnable, delay, params);
}
}
BackgroundWorker.prototype.taskCompleted = function() {
this.runningTasks -= 1;
// are any tasks waiting in queue?
if(this.taskQueue.length > 0) {
// it seems so! let's run it x)
var taskInfo = this.taskQueue.splice(0, 1)[0];
this.runTask(taskInfo.task, taskInfo.delay, taskInfo.params);
}
}
You can use it like this:
var myFunction = function() {
...
}
var myFunctionB = function() {
...
}
var myParams = { name: "John" };
var bgworker = new BackgroundWorker();
bgworker.runTask(myFunction, 0, myParams);
bgworker.runTask(myFunctionB, 0, null);

Function.prototype.applyAsync = function(params, cb){
var function_context = this;
setTimeout(function(){
var val = function_context.apply(undefined, params);
if(cb) cb(val);
}, 0);
}
// usage
var double = function(n){return 2*n;};
var display = function(){console.log(arguments); return undefined;};
double.applyAsync([3], display);
Although not fundamentally different than the other solutions, I think my solution does a few additional nice things:
it allows for parameters to the functions
it passes the output of the function to the callback
it is added to Function.prototype allowing a nicer way to call it
Also, the similarity to the built-in function Function.prototype.apply seems appropriate to me.

Next to the great answer by #pimvdb, and just in case you where wondering, async.js does not offer truly asynchronous functions either. Here is a (very) stripped down version of the library's main method:
function asyncify(func) { // signature: func(array)
return function (array, callback) {
var result;
try {
result = func.apply(this, array);
} catch (e) {
return callback(e);
}
/* code ommited in case func returns a promise */
callback(null, result);
};
}
So the function protects from errors and gracefully hands it to the callback to handle, but the code is as synchronous as any other JS function.

Unfortunately, JavaScript doesn't provide an async functionality. It works only in a single one thread. But the most of the modern browsers provide Workers, that are second scripts which gets executed in background and can return a result.
So, I reached a solution I think it's useful to asynchronously run a function, which creates a worker for each async call.
The code below contains the function async to call in background.
Function.prototype.async = function(callback) {
let blob = new Blob([ "self.addEventListener('message', function(e) { self.postMessage({ result: (" + this + ").apply(null, e.data) }); }, false);" ], { type: "text/javascript" });
let worker = new Worker(window.URL.createObjectURL(blob));
worker.addEventListener("message", function(e) {
this(e.data.result);
}.bind(callback), false);
return function() {
this.postMessage(Array.from(arguments));
}.bind(worker);
};
This is an example for usage:
(function(x) {
for (let i = 0; i < 999999999; i++) {}
return x * 2;
}).async(function(result) {
alert(result);
})(10);
This executes a function which iterate a for with a huge number to take time as demonstration of asynchronicity, and then gets the double of the passed number.
The async method provides a function which calls the wanted function in background, and in that which is provided as parameter of async callbacks the return in its unique parameter.
So in the callback function I alert the result.

MDN has a good example on the use of setTimeout preserving "this".
Like the following:
function doSomething() {
// use 'this' to handle the selected element here
}
$(".someSelector").each(function() {
setTimeout(doSomething.bind(this), 0);
});

Call a function after previous function is complete

I have the following JavaScript code:
$('a.button').click(function(){
if (condition == 'true'){
function1(someVariable);
function2(someOtherVariable);
}
else {
doThis(someVariable);
}
});
How can I ensure that function2 is called only after function1 has completed?

Specify an anonymous callback, and make function1 accept it:
$('a.button').click(function(){
if (condition == 'true'){
function1(someVariable, function() {
function2(someOtherVariable);
});
}
else {
doThis(someVariable);
}
});
function function1(param, callback) {
...do stuff
callback();
}

If you're using jQuery 1.5 you can use the new Deferreds pattern:
$('a.button').click(function(){
if(condition == 'true'){
$.when(function1()).then(function2());
}
else {
doThis(someVariable);
}
});
Edit: Updated blog link:
Rebecca Murphy had a great write-up on this here: http://rmurphey.com/blog/2010/12/25/deferreds-coming-to-jquery/

Try this :
function method1(){
// some code
}
function method2(){
// some code
}
$.ajax({
url:method1(),
success:function(){
method2();
}
})

This answer uses promises, a JavaScript feature of the ECMAScript 6 standard. If your target platform does not support promises, polyfill it with PromiseJs.
Promises are a new (and a lot better) way to handle asynchronous operations in JavaScript:
$('a.button').click(function(){
if (condition == 'true'){
function1(someVariable).then(function() {
//this function is executed after function1
function2(someOtherVariable);
});
}
else {
doThis(someVariable);
}
});
function function1(param, callback) {
return new Promise(function (fulfill, reject){
//do stuff
fulfill(result); //if the action succeeded
reject(error); //if the action did not succeed
});
}
This may seem like a significant overhead for this simple example, but for more complex code it is far better than using callbacks. You can easily chain multiple asynchronous calls using multiple then statements:
function1(someVariable).then(function() {
function2(someOtherVariable);
}).then(function() {
function3();
});
You can also wrap jQuery deferrds easily (which are returned from $.ajax calls):
Promise.resolve($.ajax(...params...)).then(function(result) {
//whatever you want to do after the request
});
As #charlietfl noted, the jqXHR object returned by $.ajax() implements the Promise interface. So it is not actually necessary to wrap it in a Promise, it can be used directly:
$.ajax(...params...).then(function(result) {
//whatever you want to do after the request
});

Or you can trigger a custom event when one function completes, then bind it to the document:
function a() {
// first function code here
$(document).trigger('function_a_complete');
}
function b() {
// second function code here
}
$(document).bind('function_a_complete', b);
Using this method, function 'b' can only execute AFTER function 'a', as the trigger only exists when function a is finished executing.

you can do it like this
$.when(funtion1()).then(function(){
funtion2();
})

This depends on what function1 is doing.
If function1 is doing some simple synchrounous javascript, like updating a div value or something, then function2 will fire after function1 has completed.
If function1 is making an asynchronous call, such as an AJAX call, you will need to create a "callback" method (most ajax API's have a callback function parameter). Then call function2 in the callback. eg:
function1()
{
new AjaxCall(ajaxOptions, MyCallback);
}
function MyCallback(result)
{
function2(result);
}

If method 1 has to be executed after method 2, 3, 4. The following code snippet can be the solution for this using Deferred object in JavaScript.
function method1(){
var dfd = new $.Deferred();
setTimeout(function(){
console.log("Inside Method - 1");
method2(dfd);
}, 5000);
return dfd.promise();
}
function method2(dfd){
setTimeout(function(){
console.log("Inside Method - 2");
method3(dfd);
}, 3000);
}
function method3(dfd){
setTimeout(function(){
console.log("Inside Method - 3");
dfd.resolve();
}, 3000);
}
function method4(){
console.log("Inside Method - 4");
}
var call = method1();
$.when(call).then(function(cb){
method4();
});
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.3.1/jquery.min.js"></script>

If function1 is some sync function that you want to turn into an async one because it takes some time to complete, and you have no control over it to add a callback :
function function1 (someVariable) {
var date = Date.now ();
while (Date.now () - date < 2000); // function1 takes some time to complete
console.log (someVariable);
}
function function2 (someVariable) {
console.log (someVariable);
}
function onClick () {
window.setTimeout (() => { function1 ("This is function1"); }, 0);
window.setTimeout (() => { function2 ("This is function2"); }, 0);
console.log ("Click handled"); // To show that the function will return before both functions are executed
}
onClick ();
The output will be :
Click handled
...and after 2 seconds :
This is function 1
This is function 2
This works because calling window.setTimeout () will add a task to the JS runtine task loop, which is what an async call makes, and because the basic principle of "run-to-completion" of the JS runtime ensures that onClick () is never interrupted before it ends.
Notice that this as funny as it makes the code difficult to understand...