I have some shared code in a single-page web application that is currently using a "globals" namespace to store a parameter as a global variable.
Using a namespace is an improvement over polluting the global "window" object, but it seems like this code is a good candidate for a closure to persist the value between invocations. I've messed around with some ideas but can't seem to get the syntax for a closure right.
Here's pseudo-code for the current version. All the code lives inside a "um" namespace. When my shared function is initially called by a new virtual page in my app, I need to store the contents of a JS object called 'extraData'. Subsequent invocations of the function don't have access to 'extraData', so I'm currently storing it in "um.globals.extraData" if underscore.js determines that the parameter is an object.
//***************************
// IMPLEMENTATION SAMPLE
//***************************
// Define namespaces (not showing: um.grid, um.ajax, um.classes, um.constants, etc.)
window.um = window.um || {};
um.globals = um.globals || {}; /* container for namespaced 'global' variables */
um.grid.loadOrUpdate = function (iOffset, isUpdate, extra) {
var ajaxParams = new um.classes.AjaxParams();
//-----
// If 'extra' is an object, store it in a global for subsequent invocations
if (_.isObject(extra)) {
// This seems like it could be a closure candidate...
um.globals.extraData = extra;
}
ajaxParams.values = [um.constants.urlPathParams.grid];
ajaxParams.verb = um.constants.httpVerbs.GET;
// Use the global variable 'extraData'
ajaxParams.extraData = um.globals.extraData;
um.ajax.callMessaging(ajaxParams);
};
And here's some pseudo-code for actually invoking the function:
//***************************
// INVOCATION SAMPLES
//***************************
// 1st invocation from virtual page 'Alpha'
um.grid.loadOrUpdate(0, false, { "alpha-key": "alpha-value" });
// 2nd invocation from virtual page 'Alpha'
um.grid.loadOrUpdate(1, true); // will re-use the "alpha" object
// 1st invocation from virtual page "Beta'
um.grid.loadOrUpdate(0, false, { "beta-key": "beta-value" });
// 2nd invocation from virtual page 'Beta'
um.grid.loadOrUpdate(1, true); // will re-use the "beta" object
How can I kill um.globals.extraData and replace this with some kind of closure inside of um.grid.loadOrUpdate?
EDIT
Here's some code from "JavaScript Patterns" that prompted me to ask this question:
var setup = function () {
var count = 0;
return function () {
return (count += 1);
}
};
// usage
var next = setup();
next(); // returns 1
next(); // returns 2
next(); // returns 3
To me, it's unclear what you're trying to achieve through closures. Closures allow you to encapsulate the state of variables within the current scope, which might be handy if you were trying to create various instances of your object, each with their own extra state.
You could do this by implementing loadOrUpdate in such a way that returns a reference to a function that can be called later. When said function is called, all the variables within that scope will be enclosed and retain the values from when the function was created.
For example:
um.grid.loadOrUpdate = function (iOffset, extra) {
var ajaxParams = new um.classes.AjaxParams();
//-----
ajaxParams.values = [um.constants.urlPathParams.grid];
ajaxParams.verb = um.constants.httpVerbs.GET;
um.ajax.callMessaging(ajaxParams);
// Return a function used to update this data later
return function (newOffset) // Update function
{
// From within here, you'll have access to iOffset and extra as they exist at this point
window.alert("Key: " + extra.key + " - Changing offset from " + iOffset + " to " + newOffset);
iOffset = newOffset;
};
};
You can then invoke your function like so, keeping in mind it will return a reference to a function:
var alpha = um.grid.loadOrUpdate(0, { "key": "alpha-value" });
var beta = um.grid.loadOrUpdate(0, { "key": "beta-value" });
When you call alpha() or beta(), the value of extra will be retained through a closure, thus there is no need to keep a global reference to it.
alpha(1); // Update from 0 to 1
alpha(2); // Update from 1 to 2
beta(3); // Update from 0 to 3
beta(4); // Update from 3 to 4
Example
However, if you're attempting to keep a single instance of extra that all calls to loadOrUpdate share, you'd probably be better off using your previous technique and just storing that current value as a property of the function itself, or anywhere else within the scope of that function.
Is this kind of approach what you're after?
var ns = {};
(function() {
var globals;
ns.func = function(update,opts) {
if(update)opts=globals;
else globals=opts;
console.log(opts);
}
})();
ns.func(false,"a");
ns.func(true);
ns.func(false,"b");
ns.func(true);
Output:
a
a
b
b
I've scoped the globals variable inside an anonymous function, and made a function declared in that function available on an object in the surrounding (in this case window) scope - so it has access to the 'globals' variable but it's not visible outside it.
Related
I've the following script:
gapi.analytics.ready(function() {
viewSelector.on('viewChange', function update (data) {
var title = document.getElementById('view-name');
title.innerHTML = data.property.name + ' (' + data.view.name + ')';
activeUsers.set(data).execute();
renderWeekOverWeekChart(data.ids);
renderTopBrowsersChart(data.ids);
renderTopCountriesChart(data.ids);
setTimeout(function() {
var list = document.getElementsByTagName("tr")[0];
list.getElementsByTagName("th")[0].innerHTML = "Pagina's";
list.getElementsByTagName("th")[1].innerHTML = "Paginaweergaven";
}, 500);
});
});
And within the following code I would like to re-run the update(); function.
function datumwissel( datumbtn ) {
if ( datumbtn.className == 'maand' ) {
datumbtn.className = 'jaar';
dimensions1 = 'ga:month,ga:nthMonth';
start1 = moment(now).date(1).month(0).format('YYYY-MM-DD');
end1 = moment(now).format('YYYY-MM-DD');
start2 = moment(now).subtract(1, 'year').date(1).month(0).format('YYYY-MM-DD');
end2 = moment(now).date(1).month(0).subtract(1, 'day').format('YYYY-MM-DD');
format1 = 'M';
format2 = 'MMM';
update();
}
else {
datumbtn.className = 'maand';
dimensions1 = 'ga:date,ga:nthWeek';
start1 = moment(now).subtract(2, 'day').date(1).format('YYYY-MM-DD');
end1 = moment(now).format('YYYY-MM-DD');
start2 = moment(now).subtract(2, 'day').date(1).subtract(1, 'month').format('YYYY-MM-DD');
end2 = moment(now).subtract(2, 'day').date(1).subtract(1, 'day').format('YYYY-MM-DD');
format1 = 'YYYYMMDD';
format2 = 'Do';
update();
}
}
But somehow this doesn't work. I also tried in the above script:
window.update = function (data) {}. But that also doesn't work.
How can I call the update(); function that is situated inside the gapi.analytics.ready(function() {} ?
Important is that I cannot make it globally as it has to be situated inside the gapi.analytics.ready().
It's really a simple matter of moving the function declaration
function update (data) {
// same as existing code
}
gapi.analytics.ready(function() {
viewSelector.on('viewChange', update );
});
And passing in data needed when you call it in your other function
function datumwissel( datumbtn ) {
if ( datumbtn.className == 'maand' ) {
..........
update(datumbtn);
}.......
Important is that I cannot make it globally as it has to be situated inside the gapi.analytics.ready()
That's not actually true - you can have it global and there at the same time. Whether you want to, is a different manner, as that would pollute the global namespace and so on. However, here is how that can be achieved:
First, extract the update function outside of the ready handler like so
function update (data) {
var title = document.getElementById('view-name');
title.innerHTML = data.property.name + ' (' + data.view.name + ')';
activeUsers.set(data).execute();
renderWeekOverWeekChart(data.ids);
renderTopBrowsersChart(data.ids);
renderTopCountriesChart(data.ids);
setTimeout(function() {
var list = document.getElementsByTagName("tr")[0];
list.getElementsByTagName("th")[0].innerHTML = "Pagina's";
list.getElementsByTagName("th")[1].innerHTML = "Paginaweergaven";
}, 500);
}
This will create a new function with the name update which accepts one parameter called data. Thanks to hoisting it would not matter if it's before or after anywhere you want to use it, as it would be effectively "pulled" to the top.
Next, you can just use the function inside the ready handler like so:
gapi.analytics.ready(function() {
viewSelector.on('viewChange', update);
});
Since .on(events, handler) accepts a function as the second parameter, you can just provide a function reference there. It doesn't matter that your function is technically declared elsewhere, as it is still going to be called with the same arguments. Similarly, if you replace update with alert you will be giving the reference to window.alert so you will get an alert with data.
With that, you can just call the same function in your other piece of code.
That is true for any place that uses callbacks, including setTimeout - you can just give a function reference and it's going to be called. Internally, those kinds of functions almost always do something like callback() or callback(someData), occasionally callback.call(/* parameters */) where callback is the passed in argument. Whether you define that argument as you are calling the function, e.g., selector.on("click", function() {/* code */}) or separately, e.g.,
function clickHandler() { /* code */ }
selector.on("click", clickHandler)
matters little.
With that said, whether you want the function global is a different matter. Unless both pieces of code are in the same place, a global function may be the easiest way. You could, also, namespace anything your app uses, which would partially avoid the global pollution. Not completely, but sometimes you just need to have things living under window if you have multiple files, in which case, you can define your own little corner there to play with: window.myApp = window.myApp || {} would create a new object that can serve as namespace and so you will be able to do things like myApp.update = function(data) { /* code */ } and thus share that code.
If your two pieces of code are indeed in one file, then you merely need to create the function outside both using var update = function(data) { /* code */ } then hand it to each in the exact same way, since update is still going to be a function reference, however, if assigned to a variable, it won't be added to the global namespace (nor would the declaration be hoisted).
I have a javascript function the initializes a bunch of global varaibles for a game.
function buildVariables(fs,fm) {
window.p1HPStart = fm.p1hp;
window.p2HPStart = fm.p2hp;
window.p1HP = 100;
window.p2HP = 100;
window.trn = 0;
}
Right now all this javascript is in the same HTML file. I want to move it to its own .js file and include it in this HTML file. I also want to replace "window" with a different global namespace like fight.p1HP.
How can I do this?
I've seen code like the below as a proposed answer in other similar questions, but I don't quite understand how it can be used to replace window.
var cartTotaler = (function () {
var total = 0; tax = 0.05;
// other code
return {
addItem : function (item) { },
removeItem : function (item) { },
calculateTitle : function () { }
};
}());
Thanks.
// initialize your own global object
if (!window.mySpace) {
window.mySpace = {};
}
// then use it
function buildVariables(fs,fm) {
mySpace.p1HPStart = fm.p1hp;
mySpace.p2HPStart = fm.p2hp;
mySpace.p1HP = 100;
mySpace.p2HP = 100;
mySpace.trn = 0;
}
Then just make sure everywhere you want one of your own variables, you use your namespace in front of it:
mySpace.variableName
Note: this doesn't really "replace" the window object (as there is no way to do that) - it just puts all your global variables into one master global object rather than pollute the global namespace with every single one of your variables.
The name mySpace can be anything you want it to be. Typically, it should be something that is unique to your application that is unlikely to conflict with something any other javascript or library might use.
(function(global){
global.p1HPStart = fm.p1hp;
global.p2HPStart = fm.p2hp;
global.p1HP = 100;
global.p2HP = 100;
global.trn = 0;
}(window));
This creates an 'immediately invoked function expression'. window is passed into the function, which then attaches a number of properties to it.
You can change window to whatever object you want, such as fight.p1HP, and this function will immediately attach the listed properties to that object.
I am trying to organize my code using the revealing module pattern.
I have a very basic question about how to set up a setter method.
$(document).ready(function() {
var designs = (function() {
var curRow,
setCurRow = function(val) {
curRow = val;
},
initTable = function() {
setCurRow(0);
};
return {
curRow : curRow,
setCurRow : setCurRow,
initTable : initTable
}
}) ();
designs.initTable();
designs.setCurRow(someNewVal);
console.log(designs.curRow);
});
The problem is that i dont get the someNewVal in the console output, I get undefined instead! I have a feeling I am doing something pretty silly here.
You can also solve this in another way by understanding the scopes of the variables and functions involved.
When you return your object constructor { curRow: curRow ... }, that just initializes the object member named curRow to the value of the variable curRow in the scope of the anonymous function; it doesn't create any persistent connection between them.
Once the anonymous function returns, calling designs.setCurRow is updating the curRow variable in that scope exactly as you expect, but that variable is now totally inaccessible to the outside world -- there is no connection between it and the curRow member of designs.
You can solve this by making the setCurRow method operate on this.curRow, as in the other solutions. In that case you don't need to make curRow a variable in the original scope, since it's entirely unused. The other solution is to add a 'getter' method to your current one:
var designs = (function() {
var curRow,
setCurRow = function(val) {
curRow = val;
},
getCurRow = function() {
return curRow;
},
initTable = function() {
setCurRow(0);
};
return {
getCurRow : getCurRow,
setCurRow : setCurRow,
initTable : initTable
};
}) ();
designs.initTable();
designs.setCurRow(someNewVal);
console.log(designs.getCurRow());
Because getCurRow and setCurRow are functions that are closed in the scope containing the variable varRow, they can reach back into that scope and access and change variables that are only accessible within it.
In this case making curRow a member of the object you return is probably simpler, but the other way is useful too since you can use it to create effectively private members and methods.
Looks like you want an object, not a module:
$(document).ready(function() {
var designs = {
setCurRow: function(val) {
this.curRow = val;
},
initTable: function() {
this.setCurRow(0);
},
curRow: 0
};
designs.initTable();
designs.setCurRow(someNewVal);
console.log(designs.curRow);
});
The problem is that setCurRow sets the value of the variable curRow after designs.curRow has already been set. Consider something like this:
var a = 1;
b = a; // sets b = a = 1
b = 2; // sets b = 2; leaves a = 1
Your code is doing the same thing, but with object-properties and setter methods to make it look complicated. :-)
As ruakh pointed out, you never re-assign curRow on the returned object, so it is always the default value. Change it to:
setCurRow = function(val) {
this.curRow = curRow = val;
},
And everything should work*.
* At least mostly - you won't be able to use call and apply on setCurRow (or pass it to setTimeout or setInterval without binding it first to your object (designs), since this is bound at call time in JavaScript.
Can anyone tell me why my 'showDiv_boo' is undefined inside the class´s method?
I also can´t access my class´s methods.
Here´s my class 'Blink' class with its properties and methods:
function Blink(div) {
this.div = div
}
Blink.prototype.counter = 0
Blink.prototype.showDiv_boo = true
Blink.prototype.showDiv = function() {
this.div.style.visibility = 'visible'
}
Blink.prototype.hideDiv = function() {
this.div.style.visibility = 'hidden'
}
Blink.prototype.startEngine = function() {
if (this.showDiv_boo) {
this.showDiv()
} else if (!this.showDiv_boo) {
this.hideDiv()
}
this.showDiv_boo = !this.showDiv_boo
this.counter++
}
Blink.prototype.startEffect = function() {
this.idEffect = setInterval(this.startEngine, 1000 / 45)
}
So, if I create:
_blink = new Blink(myDiv);
_blink.startEffect();
You can test... the variable 'showDiv_boo', is undefined inside the method.
Even, if I set the showDiv_boo inside the method to true, it won´t call my class´s methods showDiv or hideDiv.
Anyone?
Thanks :)
The reason why is that startEngine is called from setInterval. The way in which this callback is invoked causes startEngine to have a different value for this than startEffect. You need to save this in order to maintain it in the callback. For example.
Blink.prototype.startEffect = function () {
var self = this;
self.idEffect = setInterval(function () { self.startEngine(); }, 1000 / 45);
};
You need to:
use var self and call the method via self.startEngine()
use an anonymous function to wrap the call in [1] i.e. function(){ self.startEngine(); }
This is because when you just pass this.startEngine or self.startEngine you are just passing the function startEngine without specifying what this is, which in both cases is supplied by the global conext of DOMWindow.
To give an example...
function startEngine() {
...code omitted...
};
Blink.prototype.startEngine = startEngine;
Blink.prototype.start = function() {
setTimeout(startEngine, 0); // obviously wrong, what is this?
setTimeout(Blink.startEngine, 0); // actually the same as line above, although not as obvious
setTimeout(startEngine.bind(this), 0); // works correctly
}
works to add code to the prototype and if used in the anonymous function will work as expected, but if you just use Blink.startEngine as the callback it is exactly the same as using startEngine only the second is more obviously wrong because there's no object it is being called on so you'd expect this to be whatever is supplied by the context.
The other way you could do this without using the anonymous function would be
Blink.startEngine.bind(self)
Which returns a function that will call startEngine with the correct this same as explicitly creating the anonymous function and wrapping the call to self.startEngine()
Heres a link to a fiddle to play around with the differences: http://jsfiddle.net/bonza_labs/MdeTF/
If you do the following, you will find it is defined
var x = new Blink('hello');
x.showDiv_boo
Javascript uses prototypical inheritance. While showDiv_boo may not be explicitly defined within the instance of Blink that you now have, it does exist within the prototype that Blink inherits from. When you try referencing showDiv_boo from within the object, the Javascript engine realizes the object does not own a member by that name and then will check its prototype.
Along with setting a temporal variable to store this, you must call the startEngine() function with that variable:
Blink.prototype.startEffect = function(){
var self = this;
self.idEffect = setInterval(function(){ self.startEngine.call(self); }, 1000/45);
}
Note the .call(self), which basically calls the function with the variable self, so the variable this in startEngine will be the correct one.
I'm writing an application in javascript and cannot figure it out how to access the variables declared in my function, inside this jquery parse. Inside I can access global variables, but I don't really want to create global vars for these values.
Basically I want to extract file names from an xml document in the simulationFiles variable. I check if the node attribute is equal with the simName and extract the two strings inside the xml elements, that part I think it's working.
How can I extract those xml elements and append them to local variables?
function CsvReader(simName) {
this.initFileName = "somepath";
this.eventsFileName = "somepath";
$(simulationFiles).find('simulation').each(function() {
if ($(this).attr("name") == simName) {
initFileName += $(this).find("init").text();
eventsFileName += $(this).find("events").text();
}
});
}
The this in the CsvReader function is not the same this in the each() callback (where instead it is the current element in the iteration). To access the scope of the outer function within the callback, we need to be able to reference it by another name, which you can define in the outer scope:
function CsvReader(simName) {
this.initFileName = "somepath";
this.eventsFileName = "somepath";
var self = this; // reference to this in current scope
$(simulationFiles).find('simulation').each(function() {
if ($(this).attr("name") == simName) {
// access the variables using self instead of this
self.initFileName += $(this).find("init").text();
self.eventsFileName += $(this).find("events").text();
}
});
}
I made a working demo (I changed it to use classes so it would work with HTML).
function CsvReader(simName) {
this.initFileName = "somepath";
this.eventsFileName = "somepath";
var context = this;
$(simulationFiles).find('simulation').each(function() {
if ($(this).attr("name") == simName) {
context.initFileName += $(this).find("init").text();
context.eventsFileName += $(this).find("events").text();
}
});
}
The simplest change you can do to make it work is... Change your function in each from normal ( function() {}) to arrow function ( () => {} ) that will automatically take the context of the function in which it is defined.