We Keep Coding

Javascript & knockoutjs: how to refactor the following code to be able to access the properties outside the function

Im struggling to find a way to get the properties Override & Justification available outside of the function. The code is:
self.CasOverridesViewModel = ko.observable(self.CasOverridesViewModel);
var hasOverrides = typeof self.CasOverridesViewModel === typeof(Function);
if (hasOverrides) {
self.setupOverrides = function() {
var extendViewModel = function(obj, extend) {
for (var property in obj) {
if (obj.hasOwnProperty(property)) {
extend(obj[property]);
}
}
};
extendViewModel(self.CasOverridesViewModel(), function(item) {
item.isOverrideFilledIn = ko.computed( function() {
var result = false;
if (!!item.Override()) {
result = true;
}
return result;
});
if (item) {
item.isJustificationMissing = ko.computed(function() {
var override = item.Override();
var result = false;
if (!!override) {
result = !item.hasAtleastNineWords();
}
return result;
});
item.hasAtleastNineWords = ko.computed(function() {
var justification = item.Justification(),
moreThanNineWords = false;
if (justification != null) {
moreThanNineWords = justification.trim().split(/\s+/).length > 9;
}
return moreThanNineWords;
});
item.isValid = ko.computed(function() {
return (!item.isJustificationMissing());
});
}
});
}();
}
I've tried it by setting up a global variable like:
var item;
or
var obj;
if(hasOverrides) {...
So the thing that gets me the most that im not able to grasp how the connection is made
between the underlying model CasOverridesviewModel. As i assumed that self.CasOverridesViewModel.Override() would be able to fetch the data that is written on the screen.
Another try i did was var override = ko.observable(self.CasOverridesViewModel.Override()), which led to js typeError as you cannot read from an undefined object.
So if anyone is able to give me some guidance on how to get the fields from an input field available outside of this function. It would be deeply appreciated.
If I need to clarify some aspects do not hesitate to ask.
The upmost gratitude!

not sure how far outside you wanted to go with your variable but if you just define your global var at root level but only add to it at the moment your inner variable gets a value, you won't get the error of setting undefined.
var root = {
override: ko.observable()
};
root.override.subscribe((val) => console.log(val));
var ViewModel = function () {
var self = this;
self.override = ko.observable();
self.override.subscribe((val) => root.override(val));
self.load = function () {
self.override(true);
};
self.load();
};
ko.applyBindings(new ViewModel());
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/knockout/3.4.2/knockout-min.js"></script>

.map() unable to access Object's this.function

Thanks in advance for any responses:
I don't think this is a duplicate: I reviewed that article in the first comment, that is just a general breakdown of objects and using "this" within javascript.
My other this.function's perform just fine, so I at least have the basics of JS Obj's figured out.
This issue is related to using .map() with a this.function within a constructed object.
The following Google Appscript code uses .map() to update a string in a 2d array. [[string, int],[string, int]]
For some reason, when using .map() it is am unable to access the function "this.removeLeadingZero". If that same function is placed outside of the OBJ it can be called and everything works just fine. For some reason the system claims row[0] is an [object, Object] but when I typeof(row[0]) it returns "string" as it should.
Error: TypeError: Cannot find function removeLeadingZero in object [object Object]. (line 106, file "DEEP UPC MATCH")
Is there any issue using this.function's with .map() inside an object or am I using an incorrect syntax?
function test2DMapping(){
var tool = new WorkingMappingExample()
var boot = tool.arrayBuild();
Logger.log(boot)
}
function WorkingMappingExample(){
this.arr= [["01234", 100],["401234", 101],["012340", 13],["01234", 0422141],["01234", 2],["12340",3],["01234", 1],["01234", 2],["12340",3],["01234", 1],["01234", 2],["12340",3],["01234", 1],["01234", 2],["12340",3]];
//mapping appears faster that normal iterations
this.arrayBuild = function(){
var newArray1 =
this.arr.map( function( row ) {
**var mUPC = removeLeadingZero2(row[0])** //working
**var mUPC = this.removeLeadingZero(row[0])** // not working
var index = row[1]
Logger.log(mUPC + " " + index)
row = [mUPC, index]
return row
} )
return newArray1;
};
}; //end of OBJ
//THE NEXT 2 FUNCTIONS ARE WORKING OUTSIDE OF THE OBJECT
function removeLeadingZero2(upc){
try {
if (typeof(upc[0]) == "string"){
return upc.replace(/^0+/, '')
} else {
var stringer = upc.toString();
return stringer.replace(/^0+/, '')
}
} catch (err) {
Logger.log(err);
return upc;
}
}
function trimFirstTwoLastOne (upc) {
try {
return upc.substring(2, upc.length - 1); //takes off the first 2 #'s off and the last 1 #'s
} catch (err) {
Logger.log(err);
return upc;
}
}

Inside the function that you pass to map, this doesn't refer to what you think it does. The mapping function has its own this, which refers to window, normally:
var newArray1 = this.arr.map(function(row) {
// this === window
var mUPC = this.removeLeadingZero(row[0]);
var index = row[1];
Logger.log(mUPC + " " + index);
return [mUPC, index];
});
You have four options:
Array#map takes a thisArg which you can use to tell map what the this object in the function should be:
var newArray1 = this.arr.map(function(row) {
// this === (outer this)
var mUPC = this.removeLeadingZero(row[0]);
// ...
}, this); // pass a thisArg
Manually bind the function:
var newArray1 = this.arr.map(function(row) {
// this === (outer this)
var mUPC = this.removeLeadingZero(row[0]);
// ...
}.bind(this)); // bind the function to this
Store a reference to the outer this:
var self = this;
var newArray1 = this.arr.map(function(row) {
// self === (outer this)
var mUPC = self.removeLeadingZero(row[0]);
// ...
});
Use an arrow function:
var newArray1 = this.arr.map(row => {
// this === (outer this)
var mUPC = this.removeLeadingZero(row[0]);
// ...
});
Additionally, you could stop using this and new.

I have solved this issue and below is the answer in case anyone else runs into this:
this needs to be placed into a variable:
var _this = this;
and then you can call it within the object:
var mUPC = _this.removeLeadingZero(row[0])
Javascript scope strikes again!

How to make local varible global javascript

I have this class like so :
https://jsfiddle.net/0sh7fLtp/
When I create a new object of this class, my local variable can't be seen even when I assign to window in the class:
function Hilitor() {
var excat;
this.setMatchType = function(type) {
if (type == "exact"){
window.excat = true;
}
};
this.setRegex = function(input) {
alert(excat);
};
this.apply = function(input) {
this.setRegex();
};
}
and this is how i call it :
var myHilitor = new Hilitor();
myHilitor.apply();
myHilitor.setMatchType("exact");

Not sure I completely understand your question but you are trying to compare a variable "excat" to string "excat"... See this fiddle to how you can make your var a string and then get desired output..
https://jsfiddle.net/shemdani/0sh7fLtp/5/
var myHilitor = new Hilitor();
myHilitor.setMatchType("excat");
myHilitor.apply();
function Hilitor()
{
var excat;
this.setMatchType = function(type)
{
if(type == "excat"){window.excat = true;}
};
this.setRegex = function(input)
{
alert(window.excat);
};
this.apply = function(input)
{
this.setRegex();
};
}

Two main problems
1) Your var exact inside the function is not a global variable and so not accessible on the window object. (But that's a good thing).
Your code will work if you remove window.exact for just exact
this.setMatchType = function(type)
{
if(type == "exact"){excat = true;}
};
2) You are also calling apply before you call setMatchType. Switching them like this works:
var myHilitor = new Hilitor();
myHilitor.setMatchType("excat");
myHilitor.apply();
Working example

Is this "DI" structure impossible, or should I look for a bug?

Explanation:
As a personal project, I'm trying to create my own lightweight version of Dependency Injection for JavaScript - Some would probably disagree with calling this DI because it has no interfaces, but I arrived at the conclusion that interfaces were overkill in JS since we can so easily type check. I have looked at the source of Angular, but I just feel like the complexity there may be overkill for my projects, and I'm interested in attempting my own for a learning experience anyway.
Question:
My question is, fundamentally, is the syntax I'm trying to implement impossible or not?
I'll explain my goal for the syntax, then provide the error and code snippet, and below that I'll post the full code.
Goal for Syntax:
I'd like the creation of a component, and injection of dependencies to work like this, where everything is a component, and anything can be a dependency. I created scope with a string path, using "/scopeName/subScopeName:componentName" to select a scope, so that code users can select the scope while defining the component in a simple way, using a ":" to select a component from the scope.
var JHTML = new Viziion('JHTML');
JHTML.addScope('/generate');
/* ...snip - see full code for the process component - snip ... */
JHTML.addComponent('/generate:init', function (jsonInput, process) {
var html = process(jsonInput);
return html;
}).inject([null, '/generate:process']);
The inject function just takes an array of component paths in the order the component's arguments are expected. null can be used to skip, allowing direct argument input instead, as shown above.
I also have something I call hooks, which are components stored in a certain place, and then there's a function returnUserHandle which will return an object consisting of just the hooks, so all of the functions are hidden in closures, and you can feed the code user just the usable methods, clean and easy, and can produce the final product as a library without the wiring, no need for my DI framework as a dependency. Hopefully that makes sense.
Error:
Right now, running the code (which is a very simple library to generate HTML by parsing a JSON structure) I get the error that process is undefined in the line var html = process(jsonInput);. I was having trouble understanding whether this is a fundamental design problem, or just a bug. Maybe this syntax is not possible, I'm hoping you can tell me.
Code:
Here's the code, and a link to the JS Bin.
/* Dependency Injection Framework - viziion.js */
function Viziion(appName) {
if (typeof appName == 'string') {
var that = this;
this.name = appName;
this.focus = null;
this.scope = {
'/': {
'subScopes': {},
'components': {}
}
};
this.hooks = {};
this.addScope = function(scopeName) {
if (typeof scopeName == 'string') {
var scopeArray = scopeName.split('/');
var scope = that.scope['/'];
for (var i = 0; i < scopeArray.length; i++) {
if (scopeArray[i] !== "") {
if (scope.subScopes[scopeArray[i]]) {
scope = scope.subScopes[scopeArray[i]];
} else {
scope.subScopes[scopeArray[i]] = {
'subScopes': {},
'components': {}
};
}
}
}
} else {
throw 'Scope path must be a string.';
}
return that;
};
this.addComponent = function(componentName, func) {
if (typeof componentName == 'string') {
var scopeArray = componentName.split(':');
if (scopeArray.length == 2) {
var scope = that.scope['/'];
var scopeName = scopeArray[1];
scopeArray = scopeArray[0].split('/');
for (var i = 0; i < scopeArray.length; i++) {
if (scopeArray[i] !== "") {
if ((i + 1) === scopeArray.length) {
scope.components[scopeName] = func;
that.focus = scope.components[scopeName];
} else if (scope.subScopes[scopeArray[i]]) {
scope = scope.subScopes[scopeArray[i]];
} else {
throw 'Scope path is invalid.';
}
}
}
} else {
throw 'Path does not include a component.';
}
} else {
throw 'Component path must be a string1.';
}
return that;
};
this.returnComponent = function(componentName, callback) {
if (typeof componentName == 'string') {
var scopeArray = componentName.split(':');
if (scopeArray.length == 2) {
var scope = that.scope['/'];
var scopeName = scopeArray[1];
scopeArray = scopeArray[0].split('/');
for (var i = 0; i < scopeArray.length; i++) {
if (scopeArray[i] !== "") {
if ((i + 1) === scopeArray.length) {
//console.log('yep1');
//console.log(scope.components[scopeName]);
callback(scope.components[scopeName]);
} else if (scope.subScopes[scopeArray[i]]) {
scope = scope.subScopes[scopeArray[i]];
} else {
throw 'Scope path is invalid.';
}
}
}
} else {
throw 'Path does not include a component.';
}
} else {
throw 'Component path must be a string2.';
}
};
this.addHook = function(hookName, func) {
if (typeof hookName == 'string') {
that.hooks[hookName] = func;
that.focus = that.hooks[hookName];
} else {
throw 'Hook name must be a string.';
}
return that;
};
this.inject = function(dependencyArray) {
if (dependencyArray) {
var args = [];
for (var i = 0; i < dependencyArray.length; i++) {
if (dependencyArray[i] !== null) {
that.returnComponent(dependencyArray[i], function(dependency) {
args.push(dependency);
});
}
}
console.log(that.focus);
that.focus.apply(null, args);
return that;
}
};
this.returnUserHandle = function() {
return that.hooks;
};
} else {
throw 'Viziion name must be a string.';
}
}
/* JSON HTML Generator - A Simple Library Using Viziion */
var JHTML = new Viziion('JHTML');
JHTML.addScope('/generate');
JHTML.addComponent('/generate:process', function(children) {
var html = [];
var loop = function() {
for (var i = 0; i < children.length; i++) {
if (children[i].tag) {
html.push('<' + tag + '>');
if (children[i].children) {
loop();
}
html.push('</' + tag + '>');
return html;
} else {
throw '[JHTML] Bad syntax: Tag type is not defined on node.';
}
}
};
}).inject();
JHTML.addComponent('/generate:init', function(jsonInput, process) {
console.log(process);
var html = process(jsonInput);
return html;
}).inject([null, '/generate:process']);
JHTML.addHook('generate', function(jsonInput, init) {
var html = init(jsonInput);
return html;
}).inject([null, '/generate:init']);
handle = JHTML.returnUserHandle();
/* HTML Generator Syntax - Client */
var htmlChunk = [{
tag: '!DOCTYPEHTML'
}, {
tag: 'html',
children: [{
tag: 'head',
children: []
}, {
tag: 'body',
children: []
}]
}];
console.log(handle.generate(htmlChunk));

is the syntax I'm trying to implement impossible or not?
It's absolutely possible, and I'm sure with a bit of bugfixing it'd work just fine.
What you're describing is essentially the same as Asynchronous Module Definition (AMD) which is used extensively for handling code dependencies.
Rather than continuing to pursue your own version of the same concept, I recommend that you give requirejs a try and follow the existing standards with your projects.

How to write this JavaScript code without eval?

How to write this JavaScript code without eval?
var typeOfString = eval("typeof " + that.modules[modName].varName);
if (typeOfString !== "undefined") {
doSomething();
}
The point is that the name of the var that I want to check for is in a string.
Maybe it is simple but I don't know how.
Edit: Thank you for the very interesting answers so far. I will follow your suggestions and integrate this into my code and do some testing and report. Could take a while.
Edit2: I had another look at the could and maybe itis better I show you a bigger picture. I am greatful for the experts to explain so beautiful, it is better with more code:
MYNAMESPACE.Loader = ( function() {
function C() {
this.modules = {};
this.required = {};
this.waitCount = 0;
this.appendUrl = '';
this.docHead = document.getElementsByTagName('head')[0];
}
function insert() {
var that = this;
//insert all script tags to the head now!
//loop over all modules:
for (var modName in this.required) {
if(this.required.hasOwnProperty(modName)){
if (this.required[modName] === 'required') {
this.required[modName] = 'loading';
this.waitCount = this.waitCount + 1;
this.insertModule(modName);
}
}
}
//now poll until everything is loaded or
//until timout
this.intervalId = 0;
var checkFunction = function() {
if (that.waitCount === 0) {
clearInterval(that.intervalId);
that.onSuccess();
return;
}
for (var modName in that.required) {
if(that.required.hasOwnProperty(modName)){
if (that.required[modName] === 'loading') {
var typeOfString = eval("typeof " + that.modules[modName].varName);
if (typeOfString !== "undefined") {
//module is loaded!
that.required[modName] = 'ok';
that.waitCount = that.waitCount - 1;
if (that.waitCount === 0) {
clearInterval(that.intervalId);
that.onSuccess();
return;
}
}
}
}
}
};
//execute the function twice a second to check if all is loaded:
this.intervalId = setInterval(checkFunction, 500);
//further execution will be in checkFunction,
//so nothing left to do here
}
C.prototype.insert = insert;
//there are more functions here...
return C;
}());
var myLoader = new MYNAMESPACE.Loader();
//some more lines here...
myLoader.insert();
Edit3:
I am planning to put this in the global namespace in variable MYNAMESPACE.loadCheck, for simplicity, so the result would be, combining from the different answers and comments:
if (MYNAMESPACE.loadCheck.modules[modName].varName in window) {
doSomething();
}
Of course I will have to update the Loader class where ever "varName" is mentioned.

in JS every variable is a property, if you have no idea whose property it is, it's a window property, so I suppose, in your case, this could work:
var typeOFString = typeof window[that.modules[modName].varName]
if (typeOFString !== "undefined") {
doSomething();
}

Since you are only testing for the existence of the item, you can use in rather than typeof.
So for global variables as per ZJR's answer, you can look for them on the window object:
if (that.modules[modName].varName in window) {
...
}
If you need to look for local variables there's no way to do that without eval. But this would be a sign of a serious misdesign further up the line.