Why is it beneficial to ditch 'this' in this example - javascript

I am trying to grasp the concepts of Javascript through online video courses, where I came upon this example below.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9oi0NY8Pen8
The instructor used this example first
var carlike = function(obj, loc) {
obj.loc = loc;
obj.move = function() {
this.loc++;
};
return obj;
};
var amy = carlike({}, 1);
amy.move();
and then changed the carlike function to
var carlike = function(obj, loc) {
obj.loc = loc;
obj.move = function() {
obj.loc++;
};
return obj;
};
Saying the Instead of referring to the parameter this which gets bound to a new value each time move is invoked we can use obj
How is this getting bound to new value. How can using obj prevent this.

When you call amy.move(), within move the "variable" this gets the value of amy, which is an object. If move contains the code this.loc++, then the value of the property amy.loc will be incremented.
You can, however, invoke that function in other ways. For example:
var func = amy.move; // copies reference to function into variable func
func(); // "this" is unspecified
In the above case, because this is unspecified, it defaults to window (in non-strict mode) or undefined (in strict mode).
Or:
var bill = { loc: 4 };
amy.move.call(bill); // "this" is bill, not amy
On the other hand, if the move function contains the code obj.loc++, then it will always increment the loc of same object: namely, the one that was passed to carlike when this instance of move was created:
var amy = carlike({}, 1);
var bill = { loc: 4 };
amy.move.call(bill); // "this" is bill, not amy
console.log(amy.loc); // prints 2
console.log(bill.loc); // prints 4
The move function, when created, becomes a closure on the local variable obj within carlike.
In this small example, there is no particular benefit to doing this, but closures are a powerful technique in general.

When you call the move function as:
amy.move();
then you are setting the value of this within move to amy. If you do:
var b = amy.move;
b();
you are now calling the function without setting this, so it defaults to the global/window object in non–strict mode, and is undefined in strict mode. By using:
obj.loc = loc;
obj.move = function() {
obj.loc++;
};
then the function keeps a reference to obj via a closure, so no matter how the function is called, obj always references the object originally passed to carlike.

Since this in javascript is decided at function invocation. Using it inside methods causes unwanted bugs. You may not realize this if you call the function yourself using amy.move().
Ex:
var carlike = function(obj, loc) {
obj.loc = loc;
obj.move = function() {
console.log(this);
this.loc++;
};
return obj;
};
var amy = carlike({}, 1);
amy.move(); => this will corresponds to object which are returned from constructor.
setTimeout(amy.move, 1000) => this will corresponds to window
Since the constructor is returning the object, its safe to use obj inside the function amy.
Ref: this in javascript

Related

Javascript AddEventListener to local class instead of this

Coming from C++ I am confused about the "this" keyword in Javscript.
What I want to do is use the this keyword when I add an eventlistener in the subclass. However I've noticed this doesnt seem to work so I wonder how I'd make this work instead.
let myClass = new Class();
myClass.AddSubClass();
function Class()
{
this.array = new Array();
this.AddSubClass = function()
{
let sub = new SubClass();
this.array.push(sub);
}
}
function SubClass()
{
let maindiv = document.getElementById("Main");
this.btn = document.createElement("button");
this.btn.innerHTML = "Button";
this.btn.addEventListener("click", function() { this.Upgrade(); });
maindiv.appendChild(this.btn);
this.Upgrade = function()
{
//Do something
}
}
This is some quick example that I wrote there might be error but it should still show what I'm trying to accomplish.
I'm still very new to Javscript and trying to learn my way around.
Hopefully there is an easy answer to this.
What my error is that whenever I press the button. I get "this.Upgrade()" is not a function.
In an event handler, the this object is the object the handler is set on. In your case the button element.
To use the SubClass object, you need to use another variable, that in the constructor function is assigned a reference to the SubClass object:
function SubClass()
{
// ...
self = this;
// ...
this.btn.addEventListener("click", function() { self.Upgrade(); });
// ...
}
in JS, this doesn't stick to the class it is defined in, but is context sensitive.
function foo(label="") {
console.log(label, this);
}
let a = {foo, id: "a"};
let b = {foo, id: "b"};
//usually "this" is the object the function is executed of
a.foo();
b.foo();
//you can also pass the context
var c = {id:"c"};
foo.call(c, "c");
foo.apply(c, ["here", "you", "can", "pass", "an", "array", "of", "arguments"]);
//you can bind it
var d = {foo: foo.bind(c), id:"d"};
d.foo("calling on 'd' but 'this' is still 'c':");
//if you just call the function, the context is the global object
foo("plain call:");
In your case, you'd have to either store the object in this or you can use an arrow function wich has no own this.
var _this = this;
this.btn.addEventListener("click", function() { _this.Upgrade(); });
this.btn.addEventListener("click", () => this.Upgrade() );
Sidenote, coming from C++:
JS doesn't care about mismatching arguments when calling a function. If you pass too many arguments, the rest is ignored. If you pass to few, the remaininig arguments will be set to undefined.
Same for the return value, if your function doesn't explicitely return a value, it implicitely returns an undefined value.
Except for constuctor functions called with the new keyword, then you either return an object (primitives are ignored), or the implicit retun value is this;

build an object without using of "new"

How can this object be rewritten so you don't need to declare it with "new"?
var Lang = new function(){
this.get = function(str, trans){
if(TRANSLATE[str]){
var str = TRANSLATE[str][LANG];
if(count_obj(trans) > 0){
for(var key in trans){
str = str.replace('%'+key+'%', trans[key]);
}
}
}
return str;
};
};
To something like this:
var Lang = {
get : function(){}
};
You wrote the solution to your own question in the question...this is a perfectly valid way to create an object in javascript:
var Lang = {
get: function(str, trans){
if(TRANSLATE[str]){
var str = TRANSLATE[str][LANG];
if(count_obj(trans) > 0){
for(var key in trans){
str = str.replace('%'+key+'%', trans[key]);
}
}
}
return str;
};
};
If you want private variables, the usual way to do that is to create a function with local variables that return the object with those variables encapsulated in a closure like so:
var Lang = (function() {
var p1; // private variable
var p2; // another private variable
return {
getP1: function () {
return p1;
},
setP1: function(value) {
p1 = value;
}
};
})();
Note that the function that creates the object you want is executed right away and returns the object with two private variables captured in the closure. Those variables will not be accessible from outside the object.
Patterns for Enforcing new
As mentioned already, constructors are still just functions but invoked with new.
What
happens if you forget new when you invoke a constructor? This is not going to cause
syntax or runtime errors but might lead to logical errors and unexpected behavior.
That’s because when you forget new, this inside the constructor will point to the global
object. (In browsers this will point to window.)
When your constructor has something like this.member and you invoke the constructor
without new, you’re actually creating a new property of the global object called
member and accessible through window.member or simply member. This behavior is highly
undesirable, because you know you should always strive for keeping the global namespace
clean.
// constructor
function Waffle() {
this.tastes = "yummy";
}
// a new object
var good_morning = new Waffle();
console.log(typeof good_morning); // "object"
console.log(good_morning.tastes); // "yummy"
// antipattern:
// forgotten `new`
var good_morning = Waffle();
console.log(typeof good_morning); // "undefined"
console.log(window.tastes); // "yummy"
Self-Invoking Constructor
To address the drawback of the previous pattern and have prototype properties available
to the instance objects, consider the following approach. In the constructor you
check whether this is an instance of your constructor, and if not, the constructor invokes
itself again, this time properly with new:
function Waffle() {
if (!(this instanceof Waffle)) {
return new Waffle();
}
this.tastes = "yummy";
}
Waffle.prototype.wantAnother = true;
// testing invocations
var first = new Waffle(),
second = Waffle();
console.log(first.tastes); // "yummy"
console.log(second.tastes); // "yummy"
console.log(first.wantAnother); // true
console.log(second.wantAnother); // true
Another general-purpose way to check the instance is to compare with
arguments.callee instead of hard-coding the constructor name.
if (!(this instanceof arguments.callee)) {
return new arguments.callee();
}
This pattern uses the fact that inside every function, an object called arguments is created
containing all parameters passed to the function when it was invoked. And arguments
has a property called callee, which points back to the function that was called. Be
aware that arguments.callee is not allowed in ES5’s strict mode, so it’s best if you limit
its future use and also remove any instances should you find them in existing code.
“JavaScript Patterns, by Stoyan Stefanov (O’Reilly). Copyright 2010 Yahoo!, Inc., 9780596806750.”
just leave the "new" out, rest is the same. :)
var Lang = function(){
...
}
Edit: example copy-paste from firebug, "dsa" is just an object, "dsaFunc" is a function, but you can do the same with them:
>>> var dsa = {};
undefined
>>> dsa.get = function(a){ return a+1;}
function()
>>> dsa.get(2)
3
>>> var dsaFunc = function(){};
undefined
>>> dsaFunc.get = function(a){ return a+1;}
function()
>>> dsaFunc.get(2)
3

How the JavaScript this keyword works?

I have been doing some JavaScript development and I encountered this problem. Consider the following code
var obj = {};
obj.bind = function () {
console.info(this);
};
obj.bind();
I'm running the code on the FireBug JavaScript console. The expected result is that this displays a reference to the object in the console.
It actually displays undefined.
But, when I make this change to my code
var obj = {};
obj.bind = function () {
this.x = 'x';
console.info(this);
};
obj.bind();
Now the console displays the expected value of this, which is a reference to the obj object.
Why does this happen?
undefined is the return value of the function, which you'll get because you're not returning a value explicitly.
In both Chrome and Firebug, it correctly displays the Object in the console before the return value undefined.
So if you do:
var obj = {};
obj.bind = function () {
console.info(this);
return "foo";
};
obj.bind();
...you should see something like:
Object { }
"foo"
If Firebug is not displaying the Object when it is empty, you may need to check to make sure you're using the most current version.
In your example, "this" should be obj, just as some commenters pointed out. Here are the details that explain why --
In Javascript, the value of "this" changes depending on how you call the function:
When a function is stored as a property on an object, and you invoke that function by calling obj.foo(), "this" will be obj.
EX:
var obj = {
x: 1,
increment: function() {
this.x = this.x + 1;
};
obj.increment(); // Makes "this" be obj
When you invoke a function using syntax that does not refer to any owning object, "this" will be the global environment.
EX:
function someFunc(a, b) {
return a + b; // If you were to refer to "this" here, it would be the global env.
}
someFunc(5, 6);
When you invoke a function as if it were a constructor by using the new operator, a new object will be instantiated for you, and "this" will point to that new object.
EX:
function SomeConstructor() {
this.x = 42; // under the hood, a new object was instantiated for you, and "this" was set to it.
}
var result = new SomeConstructor(); // note the "new" keyword
// result will be { x:42 }
When you use call() or apply(), you can control what "this" is.
(No example here since it's fairly far from your question. Look up docs for apply() or call() for an example.)

closure not working

var Dog = function() {
var _instance = 'hello world';
return function() {
console.log(this._instance);
}
} (); //note that it is self invoking function
var l = new Dog(); //#> undefined
In the above case I was expecting an output of:
'hello world'
Why is this._instance not accessing the the variable which should be accessible by virtue of closure? I tested this in FF and am getting undefined.
You don't assign _instance to the object, it's just a closure variable, and should be accessed without using this:
var Dog = function() {
var _instance = 'hello world';
return function() {
console.log(_instance);
}
} (); //note that it is self invoking function
var l = new Dog();
I'd probably write it like so instead:
var Dog = (function() {
var defaults = {
name: 'Rags'
};
var Dog = function (options) {
// Take options as a constructor argument, this
// allows you to merge it with defaults to override
// options on specific instances
this.setOptions(options);
};
Dog.prototype = {
// Common methods for Dogs here
setOptions: function (options) {
// Declare all variables in the beginning of the method because
// JavaScript hoists variable declarations
var key = null;
// First assign all the defaults to this object
for ( key in defaults) {
this[key] = defaults[key];
}
// Now override with the values in options:
if (options && options.hasOwnProperty) {
for ( key in options ) {
this[key] = options[key];
}
}
}
};
return Dog; // Return the constructor method
} ()); // wrap the self-invoked function in paranthesis to visualize that
// it creates a closure
var buster = new Dog({name: 'Buster'}),
unnamed = new Dog();
alert(buster.name); // Alerts 'Buster'
alert(unnamed.name); // Alerts 'Rags'
Note that I have not tried to compile the above code, so it might contain a few mistakes. Nothing JsLint can't handle though!
You might want to consider adding filtering to the setOptions method so that it doesn't assign properties you don't want, or filter out methods etc declared in the options-parameter.
Additionally, if you use JQuery, or similar library, there are (often) utility functions for merging objects, making it trivial to write the setOptions-method:
function setOptions (options) {
// I assume JQuery here
// true as the first argument gives us a recursive merge
var mergedOptions = $.extend(true, defaults, options);
for (var key in mergedOptions ) {
if(this.checkAllowedProperty(key, typeof(mergedOptions[key])) {
this[key] = mergedOptions[key];
}
}
}
/**
* This method checks if propertyName is an allowed property on this object.
* If dataType is supplied it also checks if propertyName is allowed for
* dataType
* #return true if propertyName, with type dataType, is allowed on this object,
* else false
*/
function checkAllowedProperty (propertyName, dataType);
Your problem is this.
Change this._instance to _instance. You may also want to wrap your self-invoking function in parentheses like (function() { ... })(); for maximum browser compatibility.
As the others have said, you need to remove "this." from your function.
The reason for the problem is down to the binding of the "this" keyword in the two function contexts. Inside the closure, "this" refers to the function that is being returned, and not to the outer function. You could resolve this by doing the following:
var Dog = function() {
var _instance = 'hello world';
var that = this; //Assign "this" to "that"
return function() {
console.log(that._instance); //Use reference to "that"
}
} ();
var l = new Dog();
You could also probably do something closer with the function.apply() method, but I'll leave that to you.
I hope that helps.
Perhaps you are satisfied by removing "this.", but you may be interested to learn that "this" doesn't refer to what you wanted it to anyway. What it refers to really depends on how the function is called. It does not necessarily refer to an instance of an object constructed by the function you returned, or its container function, or to any other object. By default, if you merely call the function as a normal function, "this" will refer to the global window context.
What you must do to have "this" be bound to any specific object is to call the function as a method of that object, or of its prototype. e.g. foo.myMethod(). Another way is that you can use the apply or call method, passing in the object you want it to apply to. e.g. anyFunction.apply(foo).

JavaScript function declaration

Are the JavaScript code snippets given below some sort of function declaration? If not can someone please give an overview of what they are?
some_func = function(value) {
// some code here
}
and
show:function(value){
// some code here
}
There are six ways/contexts in which to create functions:
1) Standard declarative notation (most familiar to people with C background)
function foo() {}
All the rest are function expressions:
2) As a method of an object literal
var obj = {
foo: function() {}
};
3) As a method of an instantiated object (created each time new is exectued)
var Obj = function() {
this.foo = function() {};
};
4) As a method of a prototype (created only once, regardless of how many times new is executed)
var Obj = function() {};
Obj.prototype.foo = function() {};
5) As an anonymous function with a reference (same effect as #1) *
var foo = function() {};
6) As an immediately executed anonymous function (completely anonymous)
(function() {})();
* When I look at this statement, I consider the result. As such, I don't really consider these as anonymous, because a reference is immediately created to the function and is therefore no longer anonymous. But it's all the same to most people.
The first one is simply creating an anonymous function and assigning it to a variable some_func. So using some_func() will call the function.
The second one should be part of an object notation
var obj = {
show:function(value){
// some code here
}
};
So, obj.show() will call the function
In both cases, you are creating an anonymous function. But in the first case, you are simply assigning it to a variable. Whereas in the second case you are assigning it as a member of an object (possibly among many others).
First is local (or global) variable with assigned anonymous function.
var some_name = function(val) {};
some_name(42);
Second is property of some object (or function with label in front of it) with assigned anonymous function.
var obj = {
show: function(val) {},
// ...
};
obj.show(42);
Functions are first-class citizens in JavaScript, so you could assign them to variables and call those functions from variable.
You can even declare function with other name than variable which that function will be assigned to. It is handy when you want to define recursive methods, for example instead of this:
var obj = {
show: function(val) {
if (val > 0) { this.show(val-1); }
print(val);
}
};
you could write:
var obj = {
show: function f(val) {
if (val > 0) { f(val-1); }
print(val);
}
};
One way of doing it:
var some_func = function(value) {
// some code here
}
Another way:
function some_funct() {
}
Yet another way:
var some_object={};
some_object["some_func"] = function() {};
or:
var some_object={};
some_object.some_func = function() {};
In other words, they are many ways to declare a function in JS.
Your second example is not correct.
The first one is a function declaration assigned to a variable (at least it should be, despite the fact that it's missing the variable type declaration first), the second one is probably related to a object declaration.
They are called anonymous functions; you can read more about them here:
http://www.ejball.com/EdAtWork/2005/03/28/JavaScriptAnonymousFunctions.aspx
The first example creates a global variable (if a local variable of that name doesn't already exist) called some_func, and assigns a function to it, so that some_func() may be invoked.
The second example is a function declaration inside an object. it assigns a function as the value of the show property of an object:
var myObj = {
propString: "abc",
propFunction: function() { alert('test'); }
};
myObj.propFunction();
The first one...
some_func = function(value) {
// some code here
}
is declaring a variable and assigned an anonymous function to it, which is equivalent to...
function some_func (value) {
// some code here
}
The second one should look like this...
obj = {
show:function(value){
// some code here
}
}
// obj.show(value)
and equivalent to...
//pseudo code
class MyClass {
function show (value) {
// some code here
}
}
obj = new MyClass(); // obj.show(value)
Cheers

Categories