This question already has answers here:
Closed 10 years ago.
Possible Duplicate:
How to load bootstrapped models in Backbone.js while using AMD (require.js)
I am currently creating a RESTful API for one of our projects and also wanted to provide a Javascript library to access it.
Since I like the AMD principle and using require.js, I would provide an AMD module as well.
The problem is: the initialization of the module would require some information like the API key on initialization.
How do I pass such parameters into a module upon initalization?
If you have something like:
define(['dep1', 'dep2', 'dep3'], function (dep1, dep2, dep3) {
var module = {
...
};
return module;
});
change it to:
define(['dep1', 'dep2', 'dep3'], function (dep1, dep2, dep3) {
var module = {
...
};
var init = function (options) {
// Initialize here
return module;
};
return init;
});
Then after requiring your module somewhere, you can call it to initialize. You might also want to look into the factory pattern if you need something more complex and return the factory.
require.js does not restrict you in what you return. It can be a simple object, a string, a function...
I think what your looking for is the ability to set config variables that get picked up by the module. Here is an example using require.js
How to load bootstrapped models in Backbone.js while using AMD (require.js)
One other possibility that came to my mind is to use a serverside script to manipulate the source of the module when you are requesting it.
For example when you have to pass an API-key into the module, you do the following:
Before you do your first define() call, put the following code:
require.config({
paths: {
api: 'https://api.example.com/api.amd.js?api_key=f615ac61&'
}
});
This enables you to simply require your API from anywhere like this:
require(['api'], function(api){
});
So the server recieves the request - maps it thorugh mod_rewrite to some script, takes the GET parameter and puts it on the correct place in the module sourcecode, then returns the custom source.
Thats the way I solved this by now and it works like a charm, without the need to change any behaviour of the developers and it makes use of functionality thats already built into requirejs.
I don't think you can do that with require.js, but you can with Frame.js or some other module library. In Frame you would do that like this:
//moduleName.js
(function(exports){
exports.moduleName = function(args){
// do stuff
}
})(window.exports);
// in main js file
var exports = {}; // global variable
Frame('moduleName.js');
Frame(function(next){
var myArgs = { ... settings ... };
exports.moduleName(myArgs);
next();
});
Frame.init();
Is it possible to use a namespaced variable, and then to reference the appropriate object when you initialize the specific library? Maybe I don't understand exactly what you want require.js to do, but it looks like you call it from your main.js in any event, so I'm pretty sure it would work... I don't think you can do it like <script = "require.js?apiKey=jsdfhjkfklsjkfdjks">
var libData = {
apiKey: "jsdfhjkfklsjkfdjks",
otherpram: "userIDorsomething"
}
require(libData.apiKey);
but if you needed to send the apikey in the url parameter of the page, you could use a script like this to get the parameters:
<script>
function getQueryParams(qs) {
qs = qs.split("+").join(" ");
var params = {},
tokens,
re = /[?&]?([^=]+)=([^&]*)/g;
while (tokens = re.exec(qs)) {
params[decodeURIComponent(tokens[1])]
= decodeURIComponent(tokens[2]);
}
return params;
}
// assuming the page is loaded like page.html?apikey=jsdfhjkfklsjkfdjks
apiKey = getQueryParams(document.location.search).apiKey;
// however you have to call require, pass the api key?
</script>
Related
My goal is to build a set of javascript tools for functional programming, to be used by our company's web developers. I've tried giving a look at the Underscore annotated source but I'm new with RequireJS and AMD, so it's a lot confusing for me.
To start I just want to have a variable that gets available when my library is imported.
In this case booleans is a module that has functions returning boolean values. For example: _myLib.booleans.isDefined(var) - returns true is var is a defined variable.
No I have RequireJS setup, but how do I make a variable available for usage?
My main.js:
requirejs(['app/booleans'], function (booleans) {
var _myLib = {};
_myLib.booleans = booleans;
return _myLib;
});
Of course _myLib is undefined, I suppose it's because it is not assigned to any scope.
Can anyone give me some lights on building this library?
Thanks in advance.
If you want to produce a proper AMD library, you need to set it so that it calls define to define itself as an AMD module.
define(['app/booleans'], function (booleans) {
var _myLib = {};
_myLib.booleans = booleans;
return _myLib;
});
If you called your file myLib.js and provided a good configuration to RequireJS for it to find it, then, when you want to use it, you can do:
require(["myLib"], function (myLib) {
myLib.booleans.isDefined("moo");
});
Or in another module:
define(["myLib"], function (myLib) {
myLib.booleans.isDefined("blah");
});
We're developing a mobile application and we're trying to figure out the best approach to share javascript functions across the application.
At the moment we have individual files that simply have:
var LIB = {
URL: "http://localhost/service",
connect: function() {
// connect to server
$.ajax({ url: this.URL }); // etc etc
// call a private function?
this._somethingElse();
},
_somethingElse: function() {
// do something else
}
};
Then we simply call things like:
LIB.connect(); or LIB.disconnect();
across any file.
This also gives us access to LIB.URL as well.
My question is whether this approach is the best?
I've seen people use the following approach as well, but to what benefit?
var LIB = function () {
this.URL = "http://localhost/service";
this.connect = function () {
var myself = this;
// connect to server
$.ajax({ url: this.URL }); // etc etc
// call a private function?
myself._somethingElse(); // best way to invoke a private function?
};
this._somethingElse = function () {
// do something else
};
};
This requires the following:
var lib = new LIB();
lib.connect();
EDIT:
I've also seen the following:
window.lib = (function () {
function Library () {
}
var lib = {
connect: function () {
// connect to server
}
};
return lib;
}());
I'm slightly confused with all these options.
It just depends on which you like better. I (on a personal level) prefer the former, but to each his own. The latter does have the disadvantage of requiring to either remember to declare the new before using it, or having to keep track of a already created one.
Additionally, on a technical level the first one should get slightly (as in, barely noticeable) performance, as you don't have to compute a new function.
Edit Yes, the first way is definitely the fastest.
I highly recommend going with a module system. Until ES6 comes along (http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=harmony:modules), you will have to use a 3rd party library in order to do this.
Each object/class/util/etc is a module.
A module exports a public api, whereas consuming modules import other modules by declaring their dependencies.
Two "standards" that exist: AMD and CommonJS. In the browser, a library like RequireJS, which uses the AMD standard, is very popular. I recommend checking out their site first: http://requirejs.org/ and see their examples.
The main advantage here is that you only expose the public api, which allows you to create a sandbox of your functionality. It's also more explicit as it's really easy to see what your module depends on, instead of relying on global objects.
There are several different approaches to structuring JavaScript code for re-usability. You can research these and decide which is best. Me personally, I have used the second approach that you've outlined. However, I separate my code into sections and actually adhere to an MVVM structure. So for instance, I have a name space called models and view models. Each of my js files begins with:
window.[APP NAME].Models.[CLASS/MODULE NAME] or window.[APP NAME].Models.[CLASS/MODULE NAME]
So, let's say I have a namespace called mynamespace and I have a module/class called myclass. My js file would begin with:
window.MYNAMESPACE = window.MYNAMESPACE || {};
window.MYNAMESPACE.ViewModels = window.MYNAMESPACE.ViewModels || {};
window.MYNAMESPACE.ViewModels.MyClass = function () {
// a public function
this.func1 = function () {
};
// a private function
function func2() {
}
};
I would then consume that class by calling:
var myClassModel = new window.MYNAMESPACE.ViewModels.MyClass();
myClassModel.func1();
This gives you some nice encapsulation of your code. Some of the other patterns you can research/google are: Prototype Pattern, Module Pattern, Revealing Module Pattern, and the Revealing Prototype Pattern.
I hope that helps but if you have any questions on what I've just said, feel free to comment on this post.
This is my second weekend playing with Node, so this is a bit newbie.
I have a js file full of common utilities that provide stuff that JavaScript doesn't. Severely clipped, it looks like this:
module.exports = {
Round: function(num, dec) {
return Math.round(num * Math.pow(10,dec)) / Math.pow(10,dec);
}
};
Many other custom code modules - also included via require() statements - need to call the utility functions. They make calls like this:
module.exports = {
Init: function(pie) {
// does lots of other stuff, but now needs to round a number
// using the custom rounding fn provided in the common util code
console.log(util.Round(pie, 2)); // ReferenceError: util is not defined
}
};
The node.js file that is actually run is very simple (well, for this example). It just require()'s in the code and kicks off the custom code's Init() fn, like this:
var util = require("./utilities.js");
var customCode = require("./programCode.js");
customCode.Init(Math.PI);
Well, this doesn't work, I get a "ReferenceError: util is not defined" coming from the customCode. I know everything in each required file is "private" and this is why the error is occuring, but I also know that the variable holding the utility code object has GOT to be stored somewhere, perhaps hanging off of global?
I searched through global but didn't see any reference to utils in there. I was thinking of using something like global.utils.Round in the custom code.
So the question is, given that the utility code could be referred to as anything really (var u, util, or utility), how in heck can I organize this so that other code modules can see these utilities?
There are at least two ways to solve this:
If you need something from another module in a file, just require it. That's the easy one.
Provide something which actually builds the module for you. I will explain this in a second.
However, your current approach won't work as the node.js module system doesn't provide globals as you might expect them from other languages. Except for the things exported with module.exports you get nothing from the required module, and the required module doesn't know anything of the requiree's environment.
Just require it
To avoid the gap mentioned above, you need to require the other module beforehand:
// -- file: ./programCode.js
var util = require(...);
module.exports = {
Init: function(pie) {
console.log(util.Round(pie, 2));
}
};
requires are cached, so don't think too much about performance at this point.
Keep it flexible
In this case you don't directly export the contents of your module. Instead, you provide a constructor that will create the actual content. This enables you to give some additional arguments, for example another version of your utility library:
// -- file: ./programCode.js
module.exports = {
create: function(util){
return {
Init: function(pie) {
console.log(util.Round(pie, 2));
}
}
}
};
// --- other file
var util = require(...);
var myModule = require('./module').create(util);
As you can see this will create a new object when you call create. As such it will consume more memory as the first approach. Thus I recommend you to just require() things.
I am quite new to javascript and I am struggling with a simple problem. I have to split up codes into separate files. As an example I have a file called Database.js. In that file I have the following lines:
function Database(){
//someStuff
this.fetchAll = function(){
//some stuff
return something;
}
}
Now I want to use the Database.js code in the file app.js. So I write the following code in app.js:
var Database = require('Database');
var myDB = new Database();
var result = myDB.fetchAll();
However, I get the error Script Error = '[object Database]' is not a constructor (evaluating 'new Database()') at app.js (line 3).
What is my mistake?
Before you moving to the development, you need to understand thoroughly about CommonJS Modules in Titanium. Then it will be more simple for you. Also refer the require function
Let's come to your error. [ERROR] [object Database]' is not a constructor (evaluating 'new Database()') at app.js (line 3) means that the module you created is not constructor. Your constructor function might not return any value. Read simple usage of CommonJS module. I'm sure it will resolve your issue.
There is an alternative way, you can include your Database.js file in your app.js. You does not need to return anything and no need to use require function. You just need to use the include method. Just write Ti.include('Database.js'); inside your app.js and you can access all the global variables and functions inside the Database.js file
This question is old but it has not been answered yet. So i will just provide the answer for anyone who is visiting here.
You have to export you function as global. To do so you would declare it as below
exports.fetchAll = function Database(){
//some stuff
return something;
};
You can also declare the function so that it can be used globally as well as locally within the file
var fetchAll = function Database(){
//some stuff
return something;
};
exports.fetchAll = fetchAll;
Then assuming the file name is Database and it is in same folder as app.js, you can use it as below
var Database = require('Database');
var result = Database.fetchAll();
edit: This answer is javascript general and it's not oriented towards Appacelerator Titanium.
There is no such include or require in javascript. You can on the other hand do one of the following
Include a script tag before your script to include Database.js
<script type="text/javascript" src="Database.js" >
OR
Add it dynamically
function loadScript(url, callback)
{
// adding the script tag to the head as suggested before
var head = document.getElementsByTagName('head')[0];
var script = document.createElement('script');
script.type = 'text/javascript';
script.src = url;
// then bind the event to the callback function
// there are several events for cross browser compatibility
script.onreadystatechange = callback;
script.onload = callback;
// fire the loading
head.appendChild(script);
}
The problem seemed to be the usage of the variable name 'Database'. Maybe there is somewhere a name collusion.
I am sorry that I did not know that the usage of require is not a basic concept of js.
Just a quick guess here. If you use CommonJS then you have to tell what should be available outside of the module. The way you lay out that you have made the Database "object" you would need to add:
module.exports = Database;
somewhere in your module. I always put them at the end - but not sure that is a requirement.
You can also make individual functions available outside of a module by specifying:
exports.getMyDatabase = getMyDatabase;
Where "getMyDatabase" is a function you have specified in the module. I use this way to "hide" certain implementation details of some functions from the outside and just make available the functions I want the developer to be able to call ;-)
/John
I think this is the right usage of require js:
require(["Database"], function() {
var myDB = new Database();
var result = myDB.fetchAll();
});
http://requirejs.org/docs/jquery.html
There are some third party Javascript libraries that have some functionality I would like to use in a Node.js server. (Specifically I want to use a QuadTree javascript library that I found.) But these libraries are just straightforward .js files and not "Node.js libraries".
As such, these libraries don't follow the exports.var_name syntax that Node.js expects for its modules. As far as I understand that means when you do module = require('module_name'); or module = require('./path/to/file.js'); you'll end up with a module with no publicly accessible functions, etc.
My question then is "How do I load an arbitrary javascript file into Node.js such that I can utilize its functionality without having to rewrite it so that it does do exports?"
I'm very new to Node.js so please let me know if there is some glaring hole in my understanding of how it works.
EDIT: Researching into things more and I now see that the module loading pattern that Node.js uses is actually part of a recently developed standard for loading Javascript libraries called CommonJS. It says this right on the module doc page for Node.js, but I missed that until now.
It may end up being that the answer to my question is "wait until your library's authors get around to writing a CommonJS interface or do it your damn self."
Here's what I think is the 'rightest' answer for this situation.
Say you have a script file called quadtree.js.
You should build a custom node_module that has this sort of directory structure...
./node_modules/quadtree/quadtree-lib/
./node_modules/quadtree/quadtree-lib/quadtree.js
./node_modules/quadtree/quadtree-lib/README
./node_modules/quadtree/quadtree-lib/some-other-crap.js
./node_modules/quadtree/index.js
Everything in your ./node_modules/quadtree/quadtree-lib/ directory are files from your 3rd party library.
Then your ./node_modules/quadtree/index.js file will just load that library from the filesystem and do the work of exporting things properly.
var fs = require('fs');
// Read and eval library
filedata = fs.readFileSync('./node_modules/quadtree/quadtree-lib/quadtree.js','utf8');
eval(filedata);
/* The quadtree.js file defines a class 'QuadTree' which is all we want to export */
exports.QuadTree = QuadTree
Now you can use your quadtree module like any other node module...
var qt = require('quadtree');
qt.QuadTree();
I like this method because there's no need to go changing any of the source code of your 3rd party library--so it's easier to maintain. All you need to do on upgrade is look at their source code and ensure that you are still exporting the proper objects.
There is a much better method than using eval: the vm module.
For example, here is my execfile module, which evaluates the script at path in either context or the global context:
var vm = require("vm");
var fs = require("fs");
module.exports = function(path, context) {
context = context || {};
var data = fs.readFileSync(path);
vm.runInNewContext(data, context, path);
return context;
}
And it can be used like this:
> var execfile = require("execfile");
> // `someGlobal` will be a global variable while the script runs
> var context = execfile("example.js", { someGlobal: 42 });
> // And `getSomeGlobal` defined in the script is available on `context`:
> context.getSomeGlobal()
42
> context.someGlobal = 16
> context.getSomeGlobal()
16
Where example.js contains:
function getSomeGlobal() {
return someGlobal;
}
The big advantage of this method is that you've got complete control over the global variables in the executed script: you can pass in custom globals (via context), and all the globals created by the script will be added to context. Debugging is also easier because syntax errors and the like will be reported with the correct file name.
The simplest way is: eval(require('fs').readFileSync('./path/to/file.js', 'utf8'));
This works great for testing in the interactive shell.
AFAIK, that is indeed how modules must be loaded.
However, instead of tacking all exported functions onto the exports object, you can also tack them onto this (what would otherwise be the global object).
So, if you want to keep the other libraries compatible, you can do this:
this.quadTree = function () {
// the function's code
};
or, when the external library already has its own namespace, e.g. jQuery (not that you can use that in a server-side environment):
this.jQuery = jQuery;
In a non-Node environment, this would resolve to the global object, thus making it a global variable... which it already was. So it shouldn't break anything.
Edit:
James Herdman has a nice writeup about node.js for beginners, which also mentions this.
I'm not sure if I'll actually end up using this because it's a rather hacky solution, but one way around this is to build a little mini-module importer like this...
In the file ./node_modules/vanilla.js:
var fs = require('fs');
exports.require = function(path,names_to_export) {
filedata = fs.readFileSync(path,'utf8');
eval(filedata);
exported_obj = {};
for (i in names_to_export) {
to_eval = 'exported_obj[names_to_export[i]] = '
+ names_to_export[i] + ';'
eval(to_eval);
}
return exported_obj;
}
Then when you want to use your library's functionality you'll need to manually choose which names to export.
So for a library like the file ./lib/mylibrary.js...
function Foo() { //Do something... }
biz = "Blah blah";
var bar = {'baz':'filler'};
When you want to use its functionality in your Node.js code...
var vanilla = require('vanilla');
var mylibrary = vanilla.require('./lib/mylibrary.js',['biz','Foo'])
mylibrary.Foo // <-- this is Foo()
mylibrary.biz // <-- this is "Blah blah"
mylibrary.bar // <-- this is undefined (because we didn't export it)
Don't know how well this would all work in practice though.
I was able to make it work by updating their script, very easily, simply adding module.exports = where appropriate...
For example, I took their file and I copied to './libs/apprise.js'. Then where it starts with
function apprise(string, args, callback){
I assigned the function to module.exports = thus:
module.exports = function(string, args, callback){
Thus I'm able to import the library into my code like this:
window.apprise = require('./libs/apprise.js');
And I was good to go. YMMV, this was with webpack.
A simple include(filename) function with better error messaging (stack, filename etc.) for eval, in case of errors:
var fs = require('fs');
// circumvent nodejs/v8 "bug":
// https://github.com/PythonJS/PythonJS/issues/111
// http://perfectionkills.com/global-eval-what-are-the-options/
// e.g. a "function test() {}" will be undefined, but "test = function() {}" will exist
var globalEval = (function() {
var isIndirectEvalGlobal = (function(original, Object) {
try {
// Does `Object` resolve to a local variable, or to a global, built-in `Object`,
// reference to which we passed as a first argument?
return (1, eval)('Object') === original;
} catch (err) {
// if indirect eval errors out (as allowed per ES3), then just bail out with `false`
return false;
}
})(Object, 123);
if (isIndirectEvalGlobal) {
// if indirect eval executes code globally, use it
return function(expression) {
return (1, eval)(expression);
};
} else if (typeof window.execScript !== 'undefined') {
// if `window.execScript exists`, use it
return function(expression) {
return window.execScript(expression);
};
}
// otherwise, globalEval is `undefined` since nothing is returned
})();
function include(filename) {
file_contents = fs.readFileSync(filename, "utf8");
try {
//console.log(file_contents);
globalEval(file_contents);
} catch (e) {
e.fileName = filename;
keys = ["columnNumber", "fileName", "lineNumber", "message", "name", "stack"]
for (key in keys) {
k = keys[key];
console.log(k, " = ", e[k])
}
fo = e;
//throw new Error("include failed");
}
}
But it even gets dirtier with nodejs: you need to specify this:
export NODE_MODULE_CONTEXTS=1
nodejs tmp.js
Otherwise you cannot use global variables in files included with include(...).