We Keep Coding

Javascript, possible to pass undeclared method parameters without eval?

Ok, difficult to understand from the title only. Here is an example. I want a function to refer to a variable that is "injected" automagically, ie:
function abc() {
console.log(myVariable);
}
I have tried with:
with({myVariable: "value"}) { abc() }
but this doesn't work unless abc is declared within the with block, ie:
with({myVariable: "value"}) {
function abc() {
console.log(myVariable);
}
abc(); // This will work
}
So the last piece will work, but is it possible to fake the with statement, or do I have to force the developers to declare their function calls in a with statement?
Basically the call I want to do is:
doSomething({myVariable: "value"}, function() {
console.log(myVariable);
});
Ofcourse, I am aware I could pass this is a one parameter object, but that is not what I am trying to do:
doSomething({myVariable: "value"}, function(M) {
console.log(M.myVariable);
});
Further more, I am trying to avoid using eval:
with({myVariable: "value"}) {
eval(abc.toString())(); // Will also work
}
Is this not supported at at all beyond eval in Javascript?

JavaScript does not provide any straightforward way to achieve the syntax you're looking for. The only way to inject a variable into a Lexical Environment is by using eval (or the very similar Function constructor). Some of the answers to this question suggest this. Some other answers suggest using global variables as a workaround. Each of those solutions have their own caveats, though.
Other than that, your only option is to use a different syntax. The closest you can get to your original syntax is passing a parameter from doSomething to the callback, as Aadit M Shah suggested. Yes, I am aware you said you don't want to do that, but it's either that or an ugly hack...
Original answer (written when I didn't fully understand the question)
Maybe what you're looking for is a closure? Something like this:
var myVariable = "value";
function doSomething() {
console.log(myVariable);
};
doSomething(); // logs "value"
Or maybe this?
function createClosure(myVariable) {
return function() {
console.log(myVariable);
};
}
var closure = createClosure("value");
closure(); // logs "value"
Or even:
var closure = function(myVariable) {
return function() {
console.log(myVariable);
};
}("value");
closure(); // logs "value"

I asked a similar question a long time ago: Is it possible to achieve dynamic scoping in JavaScript without resorting to eval?
The short answer is no, you can't achieve dynamic scoping without resorting to eval. The long answer is, you don't need to.
JavaScript doesn't support dynamic scoping, but that's not an issue because you can make your free variables parameters of the function that they belong to.
In my humble opinion this is the best solution:
function doSomething(context, callback) {
callback(context);
}
doSomething({myVariable: "value"}, function(M) {
console.log(M.myVariable);
});
However since you don't want to write a formal parameter, the next best thing is to use this instead:
function doSomething(context, callback) {
callback.call(context);
}
doSomething({myVariable: "value"}, function() {
console.log(this.myVariable);
});
Another option would be to manipulate the formal parameter list of the program as follows:
function inject(func, properties) {
var args = [], params = [];
for (var property in properties) {
if (properties.hasOwnProperty(property)) {
args.push(properties[property]);
params.push(property);
}
}
return Function.apply(null, params.concat("return " + func.toString()))
.apply(null, args);
}
Now we can use this inject method to inject properties into a function as follows:
function doSomething(context, callback) {
var func = inject(callback, context);
func();
}
doSomething({myVariable: "value"}, function() {
console.log(myVariable);
});
See the demo: http://jsfiddle.net/sDKga/1/
Note: The inject function will create an entirely new function which will not have the same lexical scope as the original function. Hence functions with free variables and partially applied functions will not work as expected. Only use inject with normal functions.
The Function constructor is kind of like eval but it's much safer. Of course I would advise you to simply use a formal parameter or this instead. However the design decision is your choice.

Try:
function doSomething(vars, fun) {
for (var key in vars) { // set the variables in vars
window[key] = vars[key];
}
fun.call(); // call function
for (var key in vars) { // remove the variables again. this will allow only the function to use it
delete window[key];
}
}
Set global variables that can then be received inside of fun
The JSFiddle: http://jsfiddle.net/shawn31313/MbAMQ/

Warning: disgusting code ahead
function callWithContext(func, context, args) {
var oldProperties = {};
for(var n in context) {
if(context.hasOwnProperty(n)) {
var oldProperty = Object.getOwnPropertyDescriptor(self, n);
oldProperties[n] = oldProperty;
(function(n) {
Object.defineProperty(self, n, {
get: function() {
if(arguments.callee.caller === func) {
return context[n];
}
if(!oldProperty) {
return;
}
if(oldProperty.get) {
return oldProperty.get.apply(this, arguments);
}
return oldProperty.value;
},
set: function(value) {
if(arguments.callee.caller === func) {
context[n] = value;
}
if(!oldProperty) {
return;
}
if(oldProperty.set) {
return oldProperty.get.apply(this, arguments);
} else if(!oldProperty.writable) {
var fakeObject = {};
Object.defineProperty(fakeObject, n, {value: null, writable: false});
fakeObject[n] = value; // Kind of stupid, but…
return;
}
oldProperty.value = value;
}
});
})(n);
}
}
func.apply(this, args);
for(var n in context) {
if(context.hasOwnProperty(n)) {
if(oldProperties[n]) {
Object.defineProperty(self, n, oldProperties[n]);
} else {
delete self[n];
}
}
}
}
This is vomitously horrendous, by the way; don’t use it. But ew, it actually works.

i don't see why you can't just pass the info in or define a single global, but i think that would be best.
that said, i am working on a Module maker/runner that allows sloppy/dangerous code to execute without interference to the host environment. that provides the opportunity to re-define variables, which can be passed as an object.
this does use eval (Function() technically) but it can run in "use strict", so it's not too crazy/clever.
it doesn't leave behind artifacts.
it also won't let globals get hurt.
it's still a work in progress, and i need to iron out a couple minor details before i vouch for security, so don't use it for fort knox or anything, but it's working and stable enough to perform the operation asked for.
tested in ch28, FF22, IE10:
function Module(strCode, blnPreventExtensions, objWhitelist, objExtend) {
var __proto__=self.__proto__, pbu=self.__proto__, str=strCode, om=[].map, wasFN=false,
params = {Object:1}, fnScrubber, natives= [ Object, Array, RegExp, String, Boolean, Date] ,
nativeSlots = [],
preamble = "'use strict';" ,
inherited="__defineGetter__,__defineSetter__,__proto__,valueOf,constructor,__lookupGetter__,__lookupSetter__",
late = inherited +
Object.getOwnPropertyNames(__proto__||{}) + Object.getOwnPropertyNames(window);
late.split(",").sort().map(function(a) {
this[a] = 1;
}, params);
preamble+=";var "+inherited+";";
//turn functions into strings, but note that a function was passed
if(str.call){wasFN=true; str=String(str); delete params.Object; }
objExtend=objExtend||{};
var vals=Object.keys(objExtend).map(function(k){ return objExtend[k]; })
// build a usable clone of Object for all the new OOP methods it provides:
var fakeOb=Object.bind();
(Object.getOwnPropertyNames(Object)||Object.keys(Object)).map(function(a){
if(Object[a] && Object[a].bind){this[a]=Object[a].bind(Object); } return this;
},fakeOb)[0];
//allow "eval" and "arguments" since strict throws if you formalize them and eval is now presumed safe.
delete params.eval;
delete params.arguments;
params.hasOwnProperty=undefined;
params.toString=undefined;
params['__proto__']={};
__proto__=null;
Object.keys(objWhitelist||{}).map(function ripper(a,b){
b=this[a];
if(typeof b!=='object'){
delete this[a];
}
}, params);
// var ok=Object.keys.bind(Object);
// prevent new prototype methods from being added to native constructors:
if (blnPreventExtensions) {
natives.forEach(function(con, i) {
var proto=con.prototype;
Object.getOwnPropertyNames(proto).map(function(prop){
if(proto[prop] && proto[prop].bind ){ this[prop]=proto[prop];}
}, nativeSlots[i] = {});
delete con.constructor;
delete con.prototype.constructor;
}); //end con map()
} /* end if(blnPreventExtensions) */
//white-list harmless math utils and prevent hijacking:
delete params.Math;
if(blnPreventExtensions){Object.freeze(Math);}
//prevent literal constructors from getting Function ref (eg: [].constructor.constructor, /./.constructor.constructor, etc...):
Function.prototype.constructor = null;
try {
//generate a private wrapper function to evaluate code:
var response = Function(
Object.keys(objExtend) + (vals.length?",":"") +
Object.keys(params).filter(/./.test, /^[\w\$]+$/), // localize most globals
preamble + " return " + str.trim() // cram code into a function body with global-blocking formal parameters
);
// call it with a blank this object and only user-supplied arguments:
if (blnPreventExtensions) { //( user-land code must run inside here to be secure)
response = response.apply({}, vals.concat(fakeOb)).apply({}, [].slice.call(arguments,4) );
}else{
response = response.apply({}, vals.concat(fakeOb));
}
} catch (y) {
response = y + "!!";
} /* end try/catch */
if (blnPreventExtensions) {
om.call(natives, function(con, i) {
var pro=con.prototype;
//remove all proto methods for this con to censor any additions made by unsafe code:
Object.getOwnPropertyNames(pro).map(function(a){ try{delete pro[a];}catch(y){}});
//restore all original props from the backup:
var bu = nativeSlots[i];
om.call(Object.keys(bu), function(prop){ con.prototype[prop]=bu[prop]; }, bu);
}); //end con map()
} /* end if(blnPreventExtensions) */
//restore hidden Function constructor property:
Function.prototype.constructor = Function;
return response;
} /* end Module() */
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
function doSomething(context, fn){
console.log(myVariable);
return myVariable;
}
//use 1:
alert( Module(doSomething, true, {console:1}, {myVariable: "value123"} ) );// immed
//use2:
var fn=Module(doSomething, false, {console:1}, {myVariable: "value123"} );// as function
alert(fn);
alert(fn());
again, i think OP would be best off not doing things later than need be, but for the sake of comprehensiveness and inspiration i'm putting this out there in good faith.

You need to use call() to construct a context, as in:
var f=function(){
console.log(this.foo);
};
f.call({foo:'bar'})
will print "bar"

You can avoid using eval() in calling the function, if you are willing to use it in doSomething():
function abc() {
console.log(myVariable);
}
// Prints "value"
callWith({ myVariable: "value" }, abc);
function callWith(context, func) {
for(var i in context) eval('var ' + i + ' = context[i];');
eval('(' + func.toString() + ')')();
}
Have a look at this post.

Have a look at goog.partial, scroll a little bit up to see the description of what it does:
Here is an implementation of it:
var b = goog.partial(alert, 'Hello world!');
b();//alerts "Hello world!"
In the example it passes the function alert with parameter "Hello world!" but you can pass it your own function with multiple parameters.
This allows you to create a variable that points to a function that is always called with a certain paramater. To use parameters in a function that are not named you can use arguments:
function test(){
console.log(arguments);//["hello","world"]
}
test("hello","world");

Javascript Scope - including without passing or making global

I'm working on some script for a set of functions that all operate from one call and take a large number of parameters to return one value. The main function requires the use of 11 other functions which need to work with the same parameters. I have it structured somewhat like this:
function mainfunction(param1, param2, ..., param16)
{
//do a bunch of stuff with the parameters
return output;
}
function secondaryfunction1()
{
//gets called by mainfunction
//does a bunch of stuff with the parameters from mainfunction
}
Is there anything I can do to make the parameters passed to mainfunction available to all the secondary functions without passing them or making them global variables? If not, that's fine, I'll pass them as parameters - I'm curious as to whether or not I can do it more elegantly.

You can place the definition of secondaryfunction1 inside mainfunction:
function mainfunction(param1, param2, ..., param16){
function secondaryfunction1() {
// use param1, param2, ..., param16
}
secondaryfunction1();
}
Update:
As #dystroy pointed out, this is viable if you don't need to call secondaryfunction1 somewhere else. Where the list of parameters would be coming from in this case - I don't know.

You could use arguments to pass to secondaryFunction1 all the arguments of mainfunction. But that would be silly.
What you should probably do, and what is usually done, is embed all the parameters in an "options" object :
function mainfunction(options){
secondaryfunction1(options);
}
function secondaryfunction1(options) {
// use options.param1, etc.
}
// let's call it
mainfunction({param1: 0, param2: "yes?"});
This leds to other advantages, like
naming the parameters you pass, it's not a good thing for maintenance to have to count the parameters to know which one to change. No sane library would let you pass 16 parameters as direct unnamed arguments to a function
enabling you to pass only the needed parameters (the other ones being default)

#Igor 's answer (or some variation) is the way to go. If you have to use the functions elsewhere, though (as #dystroy pointed out), then there is another possibility. Combine your parameters together into an object, and pass that object to the secondary functions.
function combineEm() {
// Get all parameters into an array.
var args = [].slice.call(arguments, 0),
output = {},
i;
// Now put them in an object
for (i = 0; i < args.length; i++) {
output["param" + i] = args[i];
}
return output;
}
From your main function, you can do:
function mainfunction(param1, param2, ..., param16) {
var params = combineEm(param1, param2, ..., param16);
var output = secondaryfunction(params);
// etc.
return output;
}

Edit: I just wanted to clarify that all of the proposed suggestions so far do work. They just each have their own trade-offs/benefits.
I tried just suggesting some changes to other answers, but ultimately I felt like I needed to just post my solution to this.
var externalFn = function(options) {
var str = options.str || 'hello world';
alert(str);
};
var main = function(options) {
var privateMethod = function() {
var str = options.str || "foobar";
alert("str: " + str);
};
// Bind a private version of an external function
var privateMethodFromExternal = externalFn.bind(this, options);
privateMethod();
privateMethodFromExternal();
};
main({ str: "abc123"});
// alerts 'str: abc123'
// alerts 'abc123'
main({});
// alerts 'str: foobar'
// alerts 'hello world'
It seems like the main point of the question is that the functions used by the 'main function' shouldn't have to keep having the options/context passed to them.
This example shows how you can use privateMethods inside the function
It also shows how you can take external functions (that you presumably use outside of main) and bind a private method version of them for use inside main.
I prefer using some sort of 'options' object, but that aspect isn't really that important to the question of scoping that the OP was really asking about. You could use 'regular' parameters as well.
This example can be found on codepen.

Here's an incredibly naughty solution, if you're interested in that sort of thing.
var f1 = function() {
var a = 1;
var _f2 = f2.toString().replace(/^function[^{}]+{/, '');
_f2 = _f2.substr(0, _f2.length - 2);
eval(_f2);
}
var f2 = function(a) {
var a = a || 0;
console.log(a);
}
f2(); // logs 0
f1(); // logs 1
It executes the contents of some external function entirely in the current scope.
However, this sort of trickery is almost definitely an indicator that your project is mis-organized. Calling external functions should usually be no more difficult than passing an object around, as dystroy's answer suggests, defining the function in-scope, as Igor's answer suggests, or by attaching some external function to this and writing your functions primarily against the properties of this. Like so:
var FunLib = {
a : 0,
do : function() {
console.log(this.a);
}
}
var Class = function() {
this.a = 1;
this.do = FunLib.do;
this.somethingThatDependsOnDo = function() {
this.a++;
this.do();
}
}
var o = new Class();
FunLib.do() // 0
o.do() // 1
o.somethingThatDependsOnDo(); // 2
o.do() // 2 now
Similarly, and possibly better-solved with a class hierarchy.
function BasicShoe {
this.steps_taken = 0;
this.max_steps = 100000;
this.doStep = function() {
this.steps_taken++;
if (this.steps_taken > this.max_steps) {
throw new Exception("Broken Shoe!");
}
}
}
function Boot {
this.max_steps = 150000;
this.kick_step_equivalent = 10;
this.doKick = function() {
for (var i = 0; i < this.kick_step_equivalent; i++) {
this.doStep();
}
}
}
Boot.prototype = new BasicShoe();
function SteelTippedBoot {
this.max_steps = 175000;
this.kick_step_equivalent = 0;
}
SteelTippedBoot.prototype = new Boot();

Incorporate window.onresize into OO JS class

I'm just trying to structure my Javascript better and wondering how to incorporate window.onresize into the returned object, like so:
var baseline = function(){
var tall, newHeight, target, imgl, cur, images = [];
return {
init: function(selector, target){
this.images = document.querySelectorAll(selector);
this.target = target;
this.setbase(this.images);
window.onresize = this.setbase(this.images);
},
setbase: function(imgs){
this.imgl = imgs.length;
if(this.imgl !== 0){
while(this.imgl--){
this.cur = imgs[this.imgl];
this.cur.removeAttribute("style");
this.tall = this.cur.offsetHeight;
this.newHeight = Math.floor(this.tall / this.target) * this.target;
this.cur.style.maxHeight = this.newHeight + 'px';
}
} else {
return false;
}
}
}
}();
Is this the way that people would do it, is this going to work? Thanks
EDIT:
Invoked like so:
window.onload = function(){
baseline.init('img', '24');
};
I would like it so that when the window is resized, baseline.init is called with the same params as the initial init function call...

Here's the main error
init: function(selector, target){
this.images = document.querySelectorAll(selector);
this.target = target;
this.setbase(this.images);
// This line says call setbase now and assign the result of that
// as the onresize handler
window.onresize = this.setbase(this.images);
},
Your this.images does not point to the var images = [] you've created. This is for when you're using protoype style objects. You should just use images in your functions.
Some of your variables look like they're only used in setBase, they should be local
Looking at your object, it's very hard to tell what it's supposed to do, sounds like you're wrapping code in an object just for the sake of wrapping it into an object. What does baseline mean?
Here's a better version of your code, you should read and understand http://www.joezimjs.com/javascript/javascript-closures-and-the-module-pattern/ and http://js-bits.blogspot.com/2010/08/javascript-inheritance-done-right.html so you can decide what pattern you want to use and how they actually work. You are mixing both patterns, even though you didn't intend to. The trick is that with the way you're writing it (module pattern) there's no need to use this in the code, they're actually local variables held be the module
var baseline = function(){
// Don't use "this.tall", just "tall" gets you the variable
// Class variables, are you sure you need them throughout the class
var tall, newHeight, target, imgl, cur, images = [];
// Different name for the parameter so it doesn't get confused with
// the class variables
function init(selector, pTarget) {
images = document.querySelectorAll(selector);
target = pTarget;
setBase();
// Since we're not using this, you
// can just reference the function itself
window.onresize = setBase
}
// Most JS developers name methods using camelCase
function setBase() {
imgl = imgs.length;
if(imgl !== 0){
while(imgl--){
cur = imgs[imgl];
cur.removeAttribute("style");
tall = cur.offsetHeight;
newHeight = Math.floor(tall / target) * target;
cur.style.maxHeight = newHeight + 'px';
}
// should you return true here? what does returning
// something even mean here?
} else {
return false;
}
}
// Return just the public interface
return {
init: init
setBase: setBase
};
}();

Javascript: How do constantly monitor variables value

How do I constantly check a variables value. For example:
if(variable == 'value'){
dosomething();
}
This would work if I constantly looped it or something, but is there an efficient way of triggering that as soon as the variable is set to that value?

This solution use deprecated APIs. Computed properties and proxies are a better alternative except on the oldest browsers. See K2Span's answer for an example of how to use those.
Object.watch:
Watches for a property to be assigned a value and runs a function when that occurs.
Object.watch() for all browsers? talks about cross-browser ways to do Object.watch on browsers that don't support it natively.

Object.defineProperty(Object.prototype, 'watch', {
value: function(prop, handler){
var setter = function(val){
return val = handler.call(this, val);
};
Object.defineProperty(this, prop, {
set: setter
});
}
});
How to use:
var obj = {};
obj.watch('prop', function(value){
console.log('wow!',value);
});
obj.prop = 3;

Use setInterval:
var key = ''
setInterval(function(){
if(key == 'value'){
dosomething();
}
}, 1000);

As #Pekka commented, you can have a timer constantly poll the variable. A better solution, if it's all your code that's changing the variable, is to not just set the variable directly, but rather have all setters call a function. The function could then set the variable and do any additional processing you need.
function setValue(value) {
myVariable = value;
notifyWatchers();
}

If you encapsulate your variable so that the value can only be set by calling a function, it gives you the opportunity to check the value.
function ValueWatcher(value) {
this.onBeforeSet = function(){}
this.onAfterSet = function(){}
this.setValue = function(newVal) {
this.onBeforeSet(value, newVal)
value = newVal;
this.onAfterSet(newVal)
}
this.getValue = function() {
return value;
}
}
var name = new ValueWatcher("chris");
wacthedName.onBeforeChange = function(currentVal, newVal) {
alert("about to change from" + currentVal + " to " + newVal);
}
name.setValue("Connor");

I had a similar problem and was able to eliminate it using a timed function that I had used earlier. Even if you don't have a timed function there are easy to create;
var rand = 0
setInterval(function senseConst () {if (rand = 0) {rand = x}, 10);
//x could be equal to the variables value that you want to check
I used this to constantly have a variable that is the length of the page by making using the following code
var widthSensorOutput = 0
setInterval(function senseConst () {if (widthSensorOutput = 0) {widthSensorOutput = document.getElementById('widthSensor').clientWidth}, 10);
//'widthSensor' is a div with the width equal to 100%
I am not sure if this is the best way to solve your problem but it worked for me. To be clear, this is the the same basic code that Chandu gave, just I added what you should do once you are inside the function, which already is pretty obvious. I did not understand Chandu's post and did not realize that they used the same root code.

Is there a Javascript equivalent of Ruby's andand?

In trying to make my Javascript unobtrusive, I'm using onLoads to add functionality to <input>s and such. With Dojo, this looks something like:
var coolInput = dojo.byId('cool_input');
if(coolInput) {
dojo.addOnLoad(function() {
coolInput.onkeyup = function() { ... };
});
}
Or, approximately equivalently:
dojo.addOnLoad(function() {
dojo.forEach(dojo.query('#cool_input'), function(elt) {
elt.onkeyup = function() { ... };
});
});
Has anyone written an implementation of Ruby's andand so that I could do the following?
dojo.addOnLoad(function() {
// the input's onkeyup is set iff the input exists
dojo.byId('cool_input').andand().onkeyup = function() { ... };
});
or
dojo.byId('cool_input').andand(function(elt) {
// this function gets called with elt = the input iff it exists
dojo.addOnLoad(function() {
elt.onkeyup = function() { ... };
});
});

I don't know Dojo, but shouldn't your first example read
dojo.addOnLoad(function() {
var coolInput = dojo.byId('cool_input');
if(coolInput)
coolInput.onkeyup = function() { ... };
});
Otherwise, you might end up trying to access the element before the DOM has been built.
Back to your question: In JavaScript, I'd implement andand() as
function andand(obj, func, args) {
return obj && func.apply(obj, args || []);
}
Your example could then be written as
dojo.addOnLoad(function() {
andand(dojo.byId('cool_input'), function() {
this.onkeyup = function() { ... };
});
});
which isn't really that much shorter than using the explicit if statement - so why bother?

The exact syntax you want is not possible in JavaScript. The way JavaScript executes would need to change in a pretty fundamental fashion. For example:
var name = getUserById(id).andand().name;
// ^
// |-------------------------------
// if getUserById returns null, execution MUST stop here |
// otherwise, you'll get a "null is not an object" exception
However, JavaScript doesn't work that way. It simply doesn't.
The following line performs almost exactly what you want.
var name = (var user = getUserById(id)) ? user.name : null;
But readability won't scale to larger examples. For example:
// this is what you want to see
var initial = getUserById(id).andand().name.andand()[0];
// this is the best that JavaScript can do
var initial = (var name = (var user = getUserById(id)) ? user.name : null) ? name[0] : null;
And there is the side-effect of those unnecessary variables. I use those variables to avoid the double lookup. The variables are mucking up the context, and if that's a huge deal, you can use anonymous functions:
var name = (function() {return (var user = getUserById(id)) ? user.name : null;})();
Now, the user variable is cleaned-up properly, and everybody's happy. But wow! what a lot of typing! :)

You want dojo.behavior.
dojo.behavior.add({
'#cool_input': {
onKeyUp: function(evt) { ... }
}
});

How about something like this:
function andand(elt, f) {
if (elt)
return f(elt);
return null;
}
Call like this:
andand(dojo.byId('cool_input'), function(elt) {
// this function gets called with elt = the input iff it exists
dojo.addOnLoad(function() {
elt.onkeyup = function() { ... };
});
});

As far as I know there isn't a built-in JavaScript function that has that same functionality. I think the best solution though is to query by class instead of id and use dojo.forEach(...) as you will be guaranteed a non-null element in the forEach closure.
You could always use the JavaScript equivalent:
dojo.byId('cool_input') && dojo.byId('cool_input').whateverYouWantToDo(...);

I've never used dojo, but most javascript frameworks (when dealing with the DOM) return the calling element when a method is called from the element object (poor wording, sorry). So andand() would be implicit.
dojo.addOnLoad(function() {
dojo.byId('cool_input').onkeyup(function(evt) { /*event handler code*/
});
});

For a list:
Array.prototype.andand = function(property, fn) {
if (this.filter(property).length > 0) this.map(fn);
}