Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 1 year ago.
Improve this question
What is the best way(s) to fake function overloading in Javascript?
I know it is not possible to overload functions in Javascript as in other languages.
If I needed a function with two uses foo(x) and foo(x,y,z) which is the best / preferred way:
Using different names in the first place
Using optional arguments like y = y || 'default'
Using number of arguments
Checking types of arguments
Or how?
The best way to do function overloading with parameters is not to check the argument length or the types; checking the types will just make your code slow and you have the fun of Arrays, nulls, Objects, etc.
What most developers do is tack on an object as the last argument to their methods. This object can hold anything.
function foo(a, b, opts) {
// ...
if (opts['test']) { } //if test param exists, do something..
}
foo(1, 2, {"method":"add"});
foo(3, 4, {"test":"equals", "bar":"tree"});
Then you can handle it anyway you want in your method. [Switch, if-else, etc.]
I often do this:
C#:
public string CatStrings(string p1) {return p1;}
public string CatStrings(string p1, int p2) {return p1+p2.ToString();}
public string CatStrings(string p1, int p2, bool p3) {return p1+p2.ToString()+p3.ToString();}
CatStrings("one"); // result = one
CatStrings("one",2); // result = one2
CatStrings("one",2,true); // result = one2true
JavaScript Equivalent:
function CatStrings(p1, p2, p3)
{
var s = p1;
if(typeof p2 !== "undefined") {s += p2;}
if(typeof p3 !== "undefined") {s += p3;}
return s;
};
CatStrings("one"); // result = one
CatStrings("one",2); // result = one2
CatStrings("one",2,true); // result = one2true
This particular example is actually more elegant in javascript than C#. Parameters which are not specified are 'undefined' in javascript, which evaluates to false in an if statement. However, the function definition does not convey the information that p2 and p3 are optional. If you need a lot of overloading, jQuery has decided to use an object as the parameter, for example, jQuery.ajax(options). I agree with them that this is the most powerful and clearly documentable approach to overloading, but I rarely need more than one or two quick optional parameters.
EDIT: changed IF test per Ian's suggestion
There is no real function overloading in JavaScript since it allows to pass any number of parameters of any type. You have to check inside the function how many arguments have been passed and what type they are.
The correct answer is THERE IS NO OVERLOADING IN JAVASCRIPT.
Checking / Switching inside the function is not OVERLOADING.
The concept of overloading:
In some programming languages, function overloading or method overloading is the ability to create multiple methods of the same name with different implementations. Calls to an overloaded function will run a specific implementation of that function appropriate to the context of the call, allowing one function call to perform different tasks depending on context.
For example, doTask() and doTask(object O) are overloaded methods. To call the latter, an object must be passed as a parameter, whereas the former does not require a parameter, and is called with an empty parameter field. A common error would be to assign a default value to the object in the second method, which would result in an ambiguous call error, as the compiler wouldn't know which of the two methods to use.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Function_overloading
All suggested implementations are great, but truth to be told, there is no native implementation for JavaScript.
There are two ways you could approach this better:
Pass a dictionary (associative array) if you want to leave a lot of flexibility
Take an object as the argument and use prototype based inheritance to add flexibility.
Here is an approach that allows real method overloading using parameter types, shown below:
Func(new Point());
Func(new Dimension());
Func(new Dimension(), new Point());
Func(0, 0, 0, 0);
Edit (2018): Since this was written in 2011, the speed of direct method calls has greatly increased while the speed of overloaded methods have not.
It is not an approach I would recommend, but it is a worthwhile thought exercise to think about how you can solve these types of problems.
Here is a benchmark of the different approaches - https://jsperf.com/function-overloading. It shows that function overloading (taking types into account) can be around 13 times slower in Google Chrome's V8 as of 16.0(beta).
As well as passing an object (i.e. {x: 0, y: 0}), one can also take the C approach when appropriate, naming the methods accordingly. For example, Vector.AddVector(vector), Vector.AddIntegers(x, y, z, ...) and Vector.AddArray(integerArray). You can look at C libraries, such as OpenGL for naming inspiration.
Edit: I've added a benchmark for passing an object and testing for the object using both 'param' in arg and arg.hasOwnProperty('param'), and function overloading is much faster than passing an object and checking for properties (in this benchmark at least).
From a design perspective, function overloading is only valid or logical if the overloaded parameters correspond to the same action. So it stands to reason that there ought to be an underlying method that is only concerned with specific details, otherwise that may indicate inappropriate design choices. So one could also resolve the use of function overloading by converting data to a respective object. Of course one must consider the scope of the problem as there's no need in making elaborate designs if your intention is just to print a name, but for the design of frameworks and libraries such thought is justified.
My example comes from a Rectangle implementation - hence the mention of Dimension and Point. Perhaps Rectangle could add a GetRectangle() method to the Dimension and Point prototype, and then the function overloading issue is sorted. And what about primitives? Well, we have argument length, which is now a valid test since objects have a GetRectangle() method.
function Dimension() {}
function Point() {}
var Util = {};
Util.Redirect = function (args, func) {
'use strict';
var REDIRECT_ARGUMENT_COUNT = 2;
if(arguments.length - REDIRECT_ARGUMENT_COUNT !== args.length) {
return null;
}
for(var i = REDIRECT_ARGUMENT_COUNT; i < arguments.length; ++i) {
var argsIndex = i-REDIRECT_ARGUMENT_COUNT;
var currentArgument = args[argsIndex];
var currentType = arguments[i];
if(typeof(currentType) === 'object') {
currentType = currentType.constructor;
}
if(typeof(currentType) === 'number') {
currentType = 'number';
}
if(typeof(currentType) === 'string' && currentType === '') {
currentType = 'string';
}
if(typeof(currentType) === 'function') {
if(!(currentArgument instanceof currentType)) {
return null;
}
} else {
if(typeof(currentArgument) !== currentType) {
return null;
}
}
}
return [func.apply(this, args)];
}
function FuncPoint(point) {}
function FuncDimension(dimension) {}
function FuncDimensionPoint(dimension, point) {}
function FuncXYWidthHeight(x, y, width, height) { }
function Func() {
Util.Redirect(arguments, FuncPoint, Point);
Util.Redirect(arguments, FuncDimension, Dimension);
Util.Redirect(arguments, FuncDimensionPoint, Dimension, Point);
Util.Redirect(arguments, FuncXYWidthHeight, 0, 0, 0, 0);
}
Func(new Point());
Func(new Dimension());
Func(new Dimension(), new Point());
Func(0, 0, 0, 0);
The best way really depends on the function and the arguments. Each of your options is a good idea in different situations. I generally try these in the following order until one of them works:
Using optional arguments like y = y || 'default'. This is convenient if you can do it, but it may not always work practically, e.g. when 0/null/undefined would be a valid argument.
Using number of arguments. Similar to the last option but may work when #1 doesn't work.
Checking types of arguments. This can work in some cases where the number of arguments is the same. If you can't reliably determine the types, you may need to use different names.
Using different names in the first place. You may need to do this if the other options won't work, aren't practical, or for consistency with other related functions.
If I needed a function with two uses foo(x) and foo(x,y,z) which is the best / preferred way?
The issue is that JavaScript does NOT natively support method overloading. So, if it sees/parses two or more functions with a same names it’ll just consider the last defined function and overwrite the previous ones.
One of the way I think is suitable for most of the case is follows -
Lets say you have method
function foo(x)
{
}
Instead of overloading method which is not possible in javascript you can define a new method
fooNew(x,y,z)
{
}
and then modify the 1st function as follows -
function foo(arguments)
{
if(arguments.length==2)
{
return fooNew(arguments[0], arguments[1]);
}
}
If you have many such overloaded methods consider using switch than just if-else statements.
I'm not sure about best practice, but here is how I do it:
/*
* Object Constructor
*/
var foo = function(x) {
this.x = x;
};
/*
* Object Protoype
*/
foo.prototype = {
/*
* f is the name that is going to be used to call the various overloaded versions
*/
f: function() {
/*
* Save 'this' in order to use it inside the overloaded functions
* because there 'this' has a different meaning.
*/
var that = this;
/*
* Define three overloaded functions
*/
var f1 = function(arg1) {
console.log("f1 called with " + arg1);
return arg1 + that.x;
}
var f2 = function(arg1, arg2) {
console.log("f2 called with " + arg1 + " and " + arg2);
return arg1 + arg2 + that.x;
}
var f3 = function(arg1) {
console.log("f3 called with [" + arg1[0] + ", " + arg1[1] + "]");
return arg1[0] + arg1[1];
}
/*
* Use the arguments array-like object to decide which function to execute when calling f(...)
*/
if (arguments.length === 1 && !Array.isArray(arguments[0])) {
return f1(arguments[0]);
} else if (arguments.length === 2) {
return f2(arguments[0], arguments[1]);
} else if (arguments.length === 1 && Array.isArray(arguments[0])) {
return f3(arguments[0]);
}
}
}
/*
* Instantiate an object
*/
var obj = new foo("z");
/*
* Call the overloaded functions using f(...)
*/
console.log(obj.f("x")); // executes f1, returns "xz"
console.log(obj.f("x", "y")); // executes f2, returns "xyz"
console.log(obj.f(["x", "y"])); // executes f3, returns "xy"
Not everybody knows that you can do Destructuring assignment directly in a function signature.
Thanks to that you can easily define a very flexible method signature, which is, IMHO, superior to Java method overloading.
Example:
const myFunction = (({a, b, c}) => {
console.log(a, b, c);
});
myFunction({a: 1, b: 2});
myFunction({a: 1, b: 2, c: 3});
You don't even need to respect the order of the parameters, and there is naming consistency between the calling statement and the target method signature.
You can also assign default values:
const myFunction = (({a = 1, b = 2, c} = {}) => {
console.log(a, b, c);
});
I just tried this, maybe it suits your needs.
Depending on the number of the arguments, you can access a different function. You initialize it the first time you call it.
And the function map is hidden in the closure.
TEST = {};
TEST.multiFn = function(){
// function map for our overloads
var fnMap = {};
fnMap[0] = function(){
console.log("nothing here");
return this; // support chaining
}
fnMap[1] = function(arg1){
// CODE here...
console.log("1 arg: "+arg1);
return this;
};
fnMap[2] = function(arg1, arg2){
// CODE here...
console.log("2 args: "+arg1+", "+arg2);
return this;
};
fnMap[3] = function(arg1,arg2,arg3){
// CODE here...
console.log("3 args: "+arg1+", "+arg2+", "+arg3);
return this;
};
console.log("multiFn is now initialized");
// redefine the function using the fnMap in the closure
this.multiFn = function(){
fnMap[arguments.length].apply(this, arguments);
return this;
};
// call the function since this code will only run once
this.multiFn.apply(this, arguments);
return this;
};
Test it.
TEST.multiFn("0")
.multiFn()
.multiFn("0","1","2");
INTRODUCTION
So far reading through so many answers would give anyone a headache. Anyone trying to know the concept would need to know the following prerequisites.
Function overloading Definition, Function Length property, Function argument property
Function overloading in its simplest form means that a function performs different tasks on the basis of number of arguments that are being passed to it. Notably the TASK1, TASK2 and TASK3 are highlighted below and are being performed on the basis of the number of arguments being passed to the same function fooYo.
// if we have a function defined below
function fooYo(){
// do something here
}
// on invoking fooYo with different number of arguments it should be capable to do different things
fooYo(); // does TASK1
fooYo('sagar'); // does TASK2
fooYo('sagar','munjal'); // does TAKS3
NOTE
- JS does not provide inbuilt ability of function overloading.
Alternative
John E Resig (creator of JS) has pointed out an alternative which uses the above prerequisites to achieve the ability to implement function overloading.
The code below uses a straightforward but naive approach by using if-else or switch statement.
evaluates the argument-length property.
different values result in invocation of different functions.
var ninja = {
whatever: function() {
switch (arguments.length) {
case 0:
/* do something */
break;
case 1:
/* do something else */
break;
case 2:
/* do yet something else */
break;
//and so on ...
}
}
}
Another technique is much more clean and dynamic. The highlight of this technique is the addMethod generic function.
we define a function addMethod which is used to add different functions to an object with the same name but different functionalities.
below the addMethod function accepts three params object name object, function name name and the function that we want to be invoked fn.
Inside addMethod definition var old stores the reference to the previous function being stored by the help of closure - a protective bubble.
function addMethod(object, name, fn) {
var old = object[name];
object[name] = function(){
if (fn.length == arguments.length)
return fn.apply(this, arguments)
else if (typeof old == 'function')
return old.apply(this, arguments);
};
};
use debugger to understand the code flow.
below the addMethod adds three functions which when invoked using ninja.whatever(x) with the number of arguments x which can be anything i.e. either blank or one or more than one invokes different functions as defined while making use of the addMethod function.
var ninja = {};
debugger;
addMethod(ninja,'whatever',function(){ console.log("I am the one with ZERO arguments supplied") });
addMethod(ninja,'whatever',function(a){ console.log("I am the one with ONE arguments supplied") });
addMethod(ninja,'whatever',function(a,b){ console.log("I am the one with TWO arguments supplied") });
ninja.whatever();
ninja.whatever(1,2);
ninja.whatever(3);
Since JavaScript doesn't have function overload options object can be used instead. If there are one or two required arguments, it's better to keep them separate from the options object. Here is an example on how to use options object and populated values to default value in case if value was not passed in options object.
function optionsObjectTest(x, y, opts) {
opts = opts || {}; // default to an empty options object
var stringValue = opts.stringValue || "string default value";
var boolValue = !!opts.boolValue; // coerces value to boolean with a double negation pattern
var numericValue = opts.numericValue === undefined ? 123 : opts.numericValue;
return "{x:" + x + ", y:" + y + ", stringValue:'" + stringValue + "', boolValue:" + boolValue + ", numericValue:" + numericValue + "}";
}
here is an example on how to use options object
check this out. It is very cool.
http://ejohn.org/blog/javascript-method-overloading/
Trick Javascript to allow you to do calls like this:
var users = new Users();
users.find(); // Finds all
users.find("John"); // Finds users by name
users.find("John", "Resig"); // Finds users by first and last name
There is no way to function overloading in javascript.
So, I recommend like the following by typeof() method instead of
multiple function to fake overloading.
function multiTypeFunc(param)
{
if(typeof param == 'string') {
alert("I got a string type parameter!!");
}else if(typeof param == 'number') {
alert("I got a number type parameter!!");
}else if(typeof param == 'boolean') {
alert("I got a boolean type parameter!!");
}else if(typeof param == 'object') {
alert("I got a object type parameter!!");
}else{
alert("error : the parameter is undefined or null!!");
}
}
Good luck!
Another way to approach this is by using the special variable: arguments, this is an implementation:
function sum() {
var x = 0;
for (var i = 0; i < arguments.length; ++i) {
x += arguments[i];
}
return x;
}
so you can modify this code to:
function sum(){
var s = 0;
if (typeof arguments[0] !== "undefined") s += arguments[0];
.
.
.
return s;
}
You can now do function overloading in ECMAScript 2018 without polyfills, checking var length/type, etc., just use the spread syntax.
function foo(var1, var2, opts){
// set default values for parameters
const defaultOpts = {
a: [1,2,3],
b: true,
c: 0.3289,
d: "str",
}
// merge default and passed-in parameters
// defaultOpts must go first!
const mergedOpts = {...defaultOpts, ...opts};
// you can now refer to parameters like b as mergedOpts.b,
// or just assign mergedOpts.b to b
console.log(mergedOpts.a);
console.log(mergedOpts.b);
console.log(mergedOpts.c);
console.log(mergedOpts.d);
}
// the parameters you passed in override the default ones
// all JS types are supported: primitives, objects, arrays, functions, etc.
let var1, var2="random var";
foo(var1, var2, {a: [1,2], d: "differentString"});
// parameter values inside foo:
//a: [1,2]
//b: true
//c: 0.3289
//d: "differentString"
What is spread syntax?
The Rest/Spread Properties for ECMAScript proposal (stage 4) adds spread properties to object literals. It copies own enumerable properties from a provided object onto a new object.
More on mdn
Note: spread syntax in object literals doesn't work in Edge and IE and it is an experimental feature. see browser compatability
#Forwarding Pattern => the best practice on JS overloading
Forward to another function which name is built from the 3rd & 4th points :
Using number of arguments
Checking types of arguments
window['foo_'+arguments.length+'_'+Array.from(arguments).map((arg)=>typeof arg).join('_')](...arguments)
#Application on your case :
function foo(...args){
return window['foo_' + args.length+'_'+Array.from(args).map((arg)=>typeof arg).join('_')](...args);
}
//------Assuming that `x` , `y` and `z` are String when calling `foo` .
/**-- for : foo(x)*/
function foo_1_string(){
}
/**-- for : foo(x,y,z) ---*/
function foo_3_string_string_string(){
}
#Other Complex Sample :
function foo(...args){
return window['foo_'+args.length+'_'+Array.from(args).map((arg)=>typeof arg).join('_')](...args);
}
/** one argument & this argument is string */
function foo_1_string(){
}
//------------
/** one argument & this argument is object */
function foo_1_object(){
}
//----------
/** two arguments & those arguments are both string */
function foo_2_string_string(){
}
//--------
/** Three arguments & those arguments are : id(number),name(string), callback(function) */
function foo_3_number_string_function(){
let args=arguments;
new Person(args[0],args[1]).onReady(args[3]);
}
//--- And so on ....
As this post already contains a lot of different solutions i thought i post another one.
function onlyUnique(value, index, self) {
return self.indexOf(value) === index;
}
function overload() {
var functions = arguments;
var nroffunctionsarguments = [arguments.length];
for (var i = 0; i < arguments.length; i++) {
nroffunctionsarguments[i] = arguments[i].length;
}
var unique = nroffunctionsarguments.filter(onlyUnique);
if (unique.length === arguments.length) {
return function () {
var indexoffunction = nroffunctionsarguments.indexOf(arguments.length);
return functions[indexoffunction].apply(this, arguments);
}
}
else throw new TypeError("There are multiple functions with the same number of parameters");
}
this can be used as shown below:
var createVector = overload(
function (length) {
return { x: length / 1.414, y: length / 1.414 };
},
function (a, b) {
return { x: a, y: b };
},
function (a, b,c) {
return { x: a, y: b, z:c};
}
);
console.log(createVector(3, 4));
console.log(createVector(3, 4,5));
console.log(createVector(7.07));
This solution is not perfect but i only want to demonstrate how it could be done.
You can user the 'addMethod' from John Resig. With this method you can "overload" methods based on arguments count.
// addMethod - By John Resig (MIT Licensed)
function addMethod(object, name, fn){
var old = object[ name ];
object[ name ] = function(){
if ( fn.length == arguments.length )
return fn.apply( this, arguments );
else if ( typeof old == 'function' )
return old.apply( this, arguments );
};
}
I have also created an alternative to this method that uses caching to hold the variations of the function. The differencies are described here
// addMethod - By Stavros Ioannidis
function addMethod(obj, name, fn) {
obj[name] = obj[name] || function() {
// get the cached method with arguments.length arguments
var method = obj[name].cache[arguments.length];
// if method exists call it
if ( !! method)
return method.apply(this, arguments);
else throw new Error("Wrong number of arguments");
};
// initialize obj[name].cache
obj[name].cache = obj[name].cache || {};
// Check if a method with the same number of arguments exists
if ( !! obj[name].cache[fn.length])
throw new Error("Cannot define multiple '" + name +
"' methods with the same number of arguments!");
// cache the method with fn.length arguments
obj[name].cache[fn.length] = function() {
return fn.apply(this, arguments);
};
}
Function Overloading via Dynamic Polymorphism in 100 lines of JS
VanillaJS, no external dependencies
Full Browser Support - Array.prototype.slice, Object.prototype.toString
1114 bytes uglify'd / 744 bytes g-zipped
This is from a larger body of code which includes the isFn, isArr, etc. type checking functions. The VanillaJS version below has been reworked to remove all external dependencies, however you will have to define you're own type checking functions for use in the .add() calls.
Note: This is a self-executing function (so we can have a closure/closed scope), hence the assignment to window.overload rather than function overload() {...}.
window.overload = function () {
"use strict"
var a_fnOverloads = [],
_Object_prototype_toString = Object.prototype.toString
;
function isFn(f) {
return (_Object_prototype_toString.call(f) === '[object Function]');
} //# isFn
function isObj(o) {
return !!(o && o === Object(o));
} //# isObj
function isArr(a) {
return (_Object_prototype_toString.call(a) === '[object Array]');
} //# isArr
function mkArr(a) {
return Array.prototype.slice.call(a);
} //# mkArr
function fnCall(fn, vContext, vArguments) {
//# <ES5 Support for array-like objects
//# See: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/Function/apply#Browser_compatibility
vArguments = (isArr(vArguments) ? vArguments : mkArr(vArguments));
if (isFn(fn)) {
return fn.apply(vContext || this, vArguments);
}
} //# fnCall
//#
function registerAlias(fnOverload, fn, sAlias) {
//#
if (sAlias && !fnOverload[sAlias]) {
fnOverload[sAlias] = fn;
}
} //# registerAlias
//#
function overload(vOptions) {
var oData = (isFn(vOptions) ?
{ default: vOptions } :
(isObj(vOptions) ?
vOptions :
{
default: function (/*arguments*/) {
throw "Overload not found for arguments: [" + mkArr(arguments) + "]";
}
}
)
),
fnOverload = function (/*arguments*/) {
var oEntry, i, j,
a = arguments,
oArgumentTests = oData[a.length] || []
;
//# Traverse the oArgumentTests for the number of passed a(rguments), defaulting the oEntry at the beginning of each loop
for (i = 0; i < oArgumentTests.length; i++) {
oEntry = oArgumentTests[i];
//# Traverse the passed a(rguments), if a .test for the current oArgumentTests fails, reset oEntry and fall from the a(rgument)s loop
for (j = 0; j < a.length; j++) {
if (!oArgumentTests[i].tests[j](a[j])) {
oEntry = undefined;
break;
}
}
//# If all of the a(rgument)s passed the .tests we found our oEntry, so break from the oArgumentTests loop
if (oEntry) {
break;
}
}
//# If we found our oEntry above, .fn.call its .fn
if (oEntry) {
oEntry.calls++;
return fnCall(oEntry.fn, this, a);
}
//# Else we were unable to find a matching oArgumentTests oEntry, so .fn.call our .default
else {
return fnCall(oData.default, this, a);
}
} //# fnOverload
;
//#
fnOverload.add = function (fn, a_vArgumentTests, sAlias) {
var i,
bValid = isFn(fn),
iLen = (isArr(a_vArgumentTests) ? a_vArgumentTests.length : 0)
;
//#
if (bValid) {
//# Traverse the a_vArgumentTests, processinge each to ensure they are functions (or references to )
for (i = 0; i < iLen; i++) {
if (!isFn(a_vArgumentTests[i])) {
bValid = _false;
}
}
}
//# If the a_vArgumentTests are bValid, set the info into oData under the a_vArgumentTests's iLen
if (bValid) {
oData[iLen] = oData[iLen] || [];
oData[iLen].push({
fn: fn,
tests: a_vArgumentTests,
calls: 0
});
//#
registerAlias(fnOverload, fn, sAlias);
return fnOverload;
}
//# Else one of the passed arguments was not bValid, so throw the error
else {
throw "poly.overload: All tests must be functions or strings referencing `is.*`.";
}
}; //# overload*.add
//#
fnOverload.list = function (iArgumentCount) {
return (arguments.length > 0 ? oData[iArgumentCount] || [] : oData);
}; //# overload*.list
//#
a_fnOverloads.push(fnOverload);
registerAlias(fnOverload, oData.default, "default");
return fnOverload;
} //# overload
//#
overload.is = function (fnTarget) {
return (a_fnOverloads.indexOf(fnTarget) > -1);
} //# overload.is
return overload;
}();
Usage:
The caller defines their overloaded functions by assigning a variable to the return of overload(). Thanks to chaining, the additional overloads can be defined in series:
var myOverloadedFn = overload(function(){ console.log("default", arguments) })
.add(function(){ console.log("noArgs", arguments) }, [], "noArgs")
.add(function(){ console.log("str", arguments) }, [function(s){ return typeof s === 'string' }], "str")
;
The single optional argument to overload() defines the "default" function to call if the signature cannot be identified. The arguments to .add() are:
fn: function defining the overload;
a_vArgumentTests: Array of functions defining the tests to run on the arguments. Each function accepts a single argument and returns truethy based on if the argument is valid;
sAlias (Optional): string defining the alias to directly access the overload function (fn), e.g. myOverloadedFn.noArgs() will call that function directly, avoiding the dynamic polymorphism tests of the arguments.
This implementation actually allows for more than just traditional function overloads as the second a_vArgumentTests argument to .add() in practice defines custom types. So, you could gate arguments not only based on type, but on ranges, values or collections of values!
If you look through the 145 lines of code for overload() you'll see that each signature is categorized by the number of arguments passed to it. This is done so that we're limiting the number of tests we are running. I also keep track of a call count. With some additional code, the arrays of overloaded functions could be re-sorted so that more commonly called functions are tested first, again adding some measure of performance enhancement.
Now, there are some caveats... As Javascript is loosely typed, you will have to be careful with your vArgumentTests as an integer could be validated as a float, etc.
JSCompress.com version (1114 bytes, 744 bytes g-zipped):
window.overload=function(){'use strict';function b(n){return'[object Function]'===m.call(n)}function c(n){return!!(n&&n===Object(n))}function d(n){return'[object Array]'===m.call(n)}function e(n){return Array.prototype.slice.call(n)}function g(n,p,q){if(q=d(q)?q:e(q),b(n))return n.apply(p||this,q)}function h(n,p,q){q&&!n[q]&&(n[q]=p)}function k(n){var p=b(n)?{default:n}:c(n)?n:{default:function(){throw'Overload not found for arguments: ['+e(arguments)+']'}},q=function(){var r,s,t,u=arguments,v=p[u.length]||[];for(s=0;s<v.length;s++){for(r=v[s],t=0;t<u.length;t++)if(!v[s].tests[t](u[t])){r=void 0;break}if(r)break}return r?(r.calls++,g(r.fn,this,u)):g(p.default,this,u)};return q.add=function(r,s,t){var u,v=b(r),w=d(s)?s.length:0;if(v)for(u=0;u<w;u++)b(s[u])||(v=_false);if(v)return p[w]=p[w]||[],p[w].push({fn:r,tests:s,calls:0}),h(q,r,t),q;throw'poly.overload: All tests must be functions or strings referencing `is.*`.'},q.list=function(r){return 0<arguments.length?p[r]||[]:p},l.push(q),h(q,p.default,'default'),q}var l=[],m=Object.prototype.toString;return k.is=function(n){return-1<l.indexOf(n)},k}();
there is no actual overloading in JS, anyway we still can simulate method overloading in several ways:
method #1:
use object
function test(x,options){
if("a" in options)doSomething();
else if("b" in options)doSomethingElse();
}
test("ok",{a:1});
test("ok",{b:"string"});
method #2:
use rest (spread) parameters
function test(x,...p){
if(p[2])console.log("3 params passed"); //or if(typeof p[2]=="string")
else if (p[1])console.log("2 params passed");
else console.log("1 param passed");
}
method #3:
use undefined
function test(x, y, z){
if(typeof(z)=="undefined")doSomething();
}
method #4:
type checking
function test(x){
if(typeof(x)=="string")console.log("a string passed")
else ...
}
Something like this can be done for function overloading.
function addCSS(el, prop, val) {
return {
2: function() {
// when two arguments are set
// now prop is an oject
for (var i in prop) {
el.style[i] = prop[i];
}
},
3: function() {
// when three arguments are set
el.style[prop] = val;
}
}[arguments.length]();
}
// usage
var el = document.getElementById("demo");
addCSS(el, "color", "blue");
addCSS(el, {
"backgroundColor": "black",
"padding": "10px"
});
Source
Function overloading in Javascript:
Function overloading is the ability of a programming language to create multiple functions of the same name with different implementations. when an overloaded function is called it will run function a specific implementation of that function appropriate to the context of the call. This context is usually the amount of arguments is receives, and it allows one function call to behave differently depending on context.
Javascript doesn't have built-in function overloading. However, this behaviour can be emulated in many ways. Here is a convenient simple one:
function sayHi(a, b) {
console.log('hi there ' + a);
if (b) { console.log('and ' + b) } // if the parameter is present, execute the block
}
sayHi('Frank', 'Willem');
In scenarios where you don't know how many arguments you will be getting you can use the rest operator which is three dots .... It will convert the remainder of the arguments into an array. Beware of browser compatibilty though. Here is an example:
function foo (a, ...b) {
console.log(b);
}
foo(1,2,3,4);
foo(1,2);
While Default parameters is not overloading, it might solve some of the issues that developers face in this area. The input is strictly decided by the order, you can not re-order as you wish as in classical overloading:
function transformer(
firstNumber = 1,
secondNumber = new Date().getFullYear(),
transform = function multiply(firstNumber, secondNumber) {
return firstNumber * secondNumber;
}
) {
return transform(firstNumber, secondNumber);
}
console.info(transformer());
console.info(transformer(8));
console.info(transformer(2, 6));
console.info(transformer(undefined, 65));
function add(firstNumber, secondNumber) {
return firstNumber + secondNumber;
}
console.info(transformer(undefined, undefined, add));
console.info(transformer(3, undefined, add));
Results in (for year 2020):
2020
16160
12
65
2021
2023
More info: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Functions/Default_parameters
The Typescript Handbook mentions Overloads. While checking types and doing different logic based on results has been mentioned before, this approach defining multiple named functions to work with a typing system might be interesting to readers. Here is how TypeScript achieves creating a function that accepts multiple types of arguments that will direct the function logic to do different things based on incoming arguments and types:
The answer is to supply multiple function types for the same function as a list of overloads. This list is what the compiler will use to resolve function calls. Let’s create a list of overloads that describe what our pickCard accepts and what it returns.
let suits = ["hearts", "spades", "clubs", "diamonds"];
function pickCard(x: { suit: string; card: number }[]): number;
function pickCard(x: number): { suit: string; card: number };
function pickCard(x: any): any {
// Check to see if we're working with an object/array
// if so, they gave us the deck and we'll pick the card
if (typeof x == "object") {
let pickedCard = Math.floor(Math.random() * x.length);
return pickedCard;
}
// Otherwise just let them pick the card
else if (typeof x == "number") {
let pickedSuit = Math.floor(x / 13);
return { suit: suits[pickedSuit], card: x % 13 };
}
}
let myDeck = [
{ suit: "diamonds", card: 2 },
{ suit: "spades", card: 10 },
{ suit: "hearts", card: 4 },
];
let pickedCard1 = myDeck[pickCard(myDeck)];
alert("card: " + pickedCard1.card + " of " + pickedCard1.suit);
let pickedCard2 = pickCard(15);
alert("card: " + pickedCard2.card + " of " + pickedCard2.suit);
With this change, the overloads now give us type checked calls to the pickCard function.
In order for the compiler to pick the correct type check, it follows a similar process to the underlying JavaScript. It looks at the overload list and, proceeding with the first overload, attempts to call the function with the provided parameters. If it finds a match, it picks this overload as the correct overload. For this reason, it’s customary to order overloads from most specific to least specific.
Note that the function pickCard(x): any piece is not part of the overload list, so it only has two overloads: one that takes an object and one that takes a number. Calling pickCard with any other parameter types would cause an error.
We made over.js to solve this problem is a very elegant way. You can do:
var obj = {
/**
* Says something in the console.
*
* say(msg) - Says something once.
* say(msg, times) - Says something many times.
*/
say: Over(
function(msg$string){
console.info(msg$string);
},
function(msg$string, times$number){
for (var i = 0; i < times$number; i++) this.say(msg$string);
}
)
};
This is an old question but one that I think needs another entry (although I doubt anyone will read it). The use of Immediately Invoked Function Expressions (IIFE) can be used in conjunction with closures and inline functions to allow for function overloading. Consider the following (contrived) example:
var foo;
// original 'foo' definition
foo = function(a) {
console.log("a: " + a);
}
// define 'foo' to accept two arguments
foo = (function() {
// store a reference to the previous definition of 'foo'
var old = foo;
// use inline function so that you can refer to it internally
return function newFoo(a,b) {
// check that the arguments.length == the number of arguments
// defined for 'newFoo'
if (arguments.length == newFoo.length) {
console.log("a: " + a);
console.log("b: " + b);
// else if 'old' is a function, apply it to the arguments
} else if (({}).toString.call(old) === '[object Function]') {
old.apply(null, arguments);
}
}
})();
foo(1);
> a: 1
foo(1,2);
> a: 1
> b: 2
foo(1,2,3)
> a: 1
In short, the use of the IIFE creates a local scope, allowing us to define the private variable old to store a reference to the initial definition of the function foo. This function then returns an inline function newFoo that logs the contents of both two arguments if it is passed exactly two arguments a and b or calls the old function if arguments.length !== 2. This pattern can be repeated any number of times to endow one variable with several different functional defitions.
I would like to share a useful example of overloaded-like approach.
function Clear(control)
{
var o = typeof control !== "undefined" ? control : document.body;
var children = o.childNodes;
while (o.childNodes.length > 0)
o.removeChild(o.firstChild);
}
Usage:
Clear(); // Clears all the document
Clear(myDiv); // Clears panel referenced by myDiv
JavaScript is untyped language, and I only think that makes sense to overload a method/function with regards to the number of params. Hence, I would recommend to check if the parameter has been defined:
myFunction = function(a, b, c) {
if (b === undefined && c === undefined ){
// do x...
}
else {
// do y...
}
};
Related
// Don't break the function prototype.
// pd - https://github.com/Raynos/pd
var proto = Object.create(Function.prototype, pd({
"prop": 42
}));
var f = function() { return "is a function"; };
f.__proto__ = proto;
console.log(f.hasOwnProperty("prop")); // false
console.log(f.prop); // 42
console.log(f()); // "is a function"
.__proto__ is non-standard and deprecated.
How am I supposed to inherit prototypically creating an object but having that object be a function.
Object.create returns an Object not a Function.
new Constructor returns an Object not a Function.
Motivation: - A cross-browser finherit
var finherit = function (parent, child) {
var f = function() {
parent.apply(this, arguments);
child.apply(this, arguments);
};
f.__proto__ = parent;
Object.keys(child).forEach(function _copy(key) {
f[key] = child[key];
});
return f;
};
I don't believe this is possible, so we should probably propose a Function.create to the es-discuss mailing list
/*
Creates a new function whose prototype is proto.
The function body is the same as the function fbody.
The hash of propertydescriptors props is passed to defineproperties just like
Object.create does.
*/
Function.create = (function() {
var functionBody = function _getFunctionBody(f) {
return f.toString().replace(/.+\{/, "").replace(/\}$/, "");
};
var letters = "abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz".split("");
return function _create(proto, fbody, props) {
var parameters = letters.slice(0, fbody.length);
parameters.push(functionBody(fbody));
var f = Function.apply(this, parameters);
f.__proto__ = proto;
Object.defineProperties(f, props);
return f;
};
})();
Related es-discuss mail
As mentioned in the es-discuss thread there exists a ES:strawman <| prototype operator which would allow for this.
Let's see what it would look like using <|
var f1 = function () {
console.log("do things");
};
f1.method = function() { return 42; };
var f2 = f1 <| function () {
super();
console.log("do more things");
}
console.log(f1.isPrototypeOf(f2)); // true
console.log(f2()); // do things do more things
console.log(f2.hasOwnProperty("method")); // false
console.log(f2.method()); // 42
I hope that I'm understanding this right.
I believe you want a functor that's both an instance of a predefined prototype (yes, a class, just not a classic class) as well as directly callable? Right? If so, then this makes perfect sense and is very powerful and flexible (especially in a highly asynchronous environment like JavaScript). Sadly there is no way to do it elegantly in JavaScript without manipulating __proto__. You can do it by factoring out an anonymous function and copying all of the references to all of the methods (which seems to be the direction you were heading) to act as a proxy class. The downsides to this are...
It's very costly in terms of runtime.
(functorObj instanceof MyClass) will never be true.
Properties will not be directly accessible (if they were all assigned by reference this would be a different story, but primitives are assigned by value). This can be solved with accessors via defineProperty or simply named accessor methods if necessary (it appears that that is what you're looking for, just add all properties to the functor with defineProperty via getters/setters instead of just functions if you don't need cross-engine support/backwards compatability).
You're likely to run into edge cases where final native prototypes (like Object.prototype or Array.prototype [if you're inheriting that]) may not function as expected.
Calling functorObj(someArg) will always make the this context be the object, regardless of if it's called functorObj.call(someOtherObj, someArg) (this is not the case for method calls though)
Because the functor object is created at request time, it will be locked in time and manipulating the initial prototype will not affect the allocated functor objects like a normal object would be affected (modifying MyClass.prototype will not affect any functor objects and the reverse is true as well).
If you use it gently though, none of this should be a big deal.
In your prototype of your class define something like...
// This is you're emulated "overloaded" call() operator.
MyClass.prototype.execute = function() {
alert('I have been called like a function but have (semi-)proper access to this!');
};
MyClass.prototype.asFunctor = function(/* templateFunction */) {
if ((typeof arguments[0] !== 'function') && (typeof this.execute !== 'function'))
throw new TypeError('You really should define the calling operator for a functor shouldn\'t you?');
// This is both the resulting functor proxy object as well as the proxy call function
var res = function() {
var ret;
if (res.templateFunction !== null)
// the this context here could be res.asObject, or res, or whatever your goal is here
ret = res.templateFunction.call(this, arguments);
if (typeof res.asObject.execute === 'function')
ret = res.asObject.execute.apply(res.asObject, arguments);
return ret;
};
res.asObject = this;
res.templateFunction = (typeof arguments[0] === 'function') ? arguments[0] : null;
for (var k in this) {
if (typeof this[k] === 'function') {
res[k] = (function(reference) {
var m = function() {
return m.proxyReference.apply((this === res) ? res.asObject : this, arguments);
};
m.proxyReference = reference;
return m;
})(this.asObject[k]);
}
}
return res;
};
Resulting usage would look something like...
var aobj = new MyClass();
var afunctor = aobj.asFunctor();
aobj.someMethodOfMine(); // << works
afunctor.someMethodOfMine(); // << works exactly like the previous call (including the this context).
afunctor('hello'); // << works by calling aobj.execute('hello');
(aobj instanceof MyClass) // << true
(afunctor instanceof MyClass) // << false
(afunctor.asObject === aobj) // << true
// to bind with a previous function...
var afunctor = (new MyClass()).asFunctor(function() { alert('I am the original call'); });
afunctor() // << first calls the original, then execute();
// To simply wrap a previous function, don't define execute() in the prototype.
You could even chain bind countless other objects/functions/etc until the cows came home. Just refactor the proxy call a bit.
Hope that helps. Oh, and of course you could change the factory flow so that a constructor called without the new operator then instantiates a new object and returns the functor object. However you prefer (you could surely do it other ways too).
Finally, to have any function become the execution operator for a functor in a bit more elegant of a manner, just make the proxy function a method of Function.prototype and pass it the object to wrap if you want to do something like (you would have to swap templateFunction with this and this with the argument of course)...
var functor = (function() { /* something */ }).asFunctor(aobj);
With ES6 it's possible to inherit from Function, see (duplicate) question
javascript class inherit from Function class
default export Attribute extends Function {
...
}
I get an error whenever I try to add the object BaseNet to IPv4Address.prototype. The error:
TypeError: Cannot read property 'ipInt' of undefined
just doesn't make sense. It's behaving like the getter is actually being executed when I copy the object to the prototype. Is there a way to copy this and not get an error like this?
var _s = require('underscore')
var BaseNet = {
get network(){
return new IPv4Address((this.ipInt & this.netmask.ipInt) >>> 0);
},
}
function IPv4Address (address){
this.ipInt = address
this.netmask = {}
this.netmask.ipInt = 255
}
_s.extend(IPv4Address.prototype,BaseNet)
//also fails with generic extend:
function extend(destination, source) {
for (var k in source) {
if (source.hasOwnProperty(k)) {
destination[k] = source[k];
}
}
return destination;
}
extend(IPv4Address.prototype,BaseNet)
First Edit
Maybe this is an answer to my own question. Resig had a post on this and this "modififed" extend method seems to do what I'm looking for. Can someone explain? It seems that it's a scoping problem, but i don't understand why it was behaving like someone was actually calling the getter during the extend operation.
http://ejohn.org/blog/javascript-getters-and-setters/
function extend(a,b) {
for ( var i in b ) {
var g = b.__lookupGetter__(i), s = b.__lookupSetter__(i);
if ( g || s ) {
if ( g )
a.__defineGetter__(i, g);
if ( s )
a.__defineSetter__(i, s);
} else
a[i] = b[i];
}
return a;
}
Second Edit
So I did some more experimenting and I came up with two other ways that seems to work. One uses the extend method posted earlier and another uses the defineProperties method form the ECMA spec pointed out in the comments. Is one better than the other? It seems that the "mixin" style works better for what i'm looking for, but the Object.create way also works.
var BaseNet = {}
Object.defineProperties(BaseNet, {
"network":{
enumerable:true,
get: function (){return new IPv4Address((this.ipInt & this.netmask.ipInt) >>> 0)}
}
});
function IPv4Address (address){
this.ipInt = address
this.netmask = {}
this.netmask.ipInt = 255
}
IPv4Address.prototype = Object.create(BaseNet)
var ip = new IPv4Address(12345)
ip.netmask
Alternatively, you can also do:
var BaseNet = {}
Object.defineProperties(BaseNet, {
"network":{
enumerable:true,
get: function (){return new IPv4Address((this.ipInt & this.netmask.ipInt) >>> 0)}
}
});
function IPv4Address (address){
this.ipInt = address
this.netmask = {}
this.netmask.ipInt = 255
}
extend(IPv4Address.prototype,BaseNet)
var ip = new IPv4Address(12345)
ip.netmask
It does not work because whilst extending, the getter is executed, at which point this.netmask is not an instance at all (there are no instances created), but in fact undefined, so accessing this.netmask.ipInt throws an error (you cannot access anything from undefined or null, it throws an error in any case).
Have a look at the underlying _.extend code:
_.extend = function(obj) {
each(slice.call(arguments, 1), function(source) {
for (var prop in source) {
// source[prop] is fetched, so getter is executed
if (source[prop] !== void 0) obj[prop] = source[prop];
}
});
return obj;
};
You might instead want to iterate yourself and copy the getter "untouched" with a for in loop and Object.defineProperty.
As for your edit: Those __xxx__ functions are an ugly way to get the getter/setter function without executing it. Normally, passing a function works like someFunction without parentheses. A getter, however, would automatically get executed if you access it with someGetter.
The function you posted copies getters/setters without executing them:
function extend(a,b) {
for ( var i in b ) { // iterate over all properties
// get getter and setter functions
var g = b.__lookupGetter__(i), s = b.__lookupSetter__(i);
if ( g || s ) { // if there is a getter or setter
if ( g )
a.__defineGetter__(i, g); // copy getter to new object
if ( s )
a.__defineSetter__(i, s); // copy setter to new object
} else // if there is not getter nor setter
a[i] = b[i]; // just copy the value; nothing special
}
return a; // return the altered object
}
This is something which has been bugging me with the Google Chrome debugger and I was wondering if there was a way to solve it.
I'm working on a large Javascript application, using a lot of object oriented JS (using the Joose framework), and when I debug my code, all my classes are given a non-sensical initial display value. To see what I mean, try this in the Chrome console:
var F = function () {};
var myObj = new F();
console.log(myObj);
The output should be a single line which you can expand to see all the properties of myObj, but the first thing you see is just ▶ F.
My issue is that because of my OO framework, every single object instantiated gets the same 'name'. The code which it looks is responsible for this is like so:
getMutableCopy : function (object) {
var f = function () {};
f.prototype = object;
return new f();
}
Which means that in the debugger, the initial view is always ▶ f.
Now, I really don't want to be changing anything about how Joose instantiates objects (getMutableCopy...?), but if there was something I could add to this so that I could provide my own name, that would be great.
Some things that I've looked at, but couldn't get anywhere with:
> function foo {}
> foo.name
"foo"
> foo.name = "bar"
"bar"
> foo.name
"foo" // <-- looks like it is read only
Object.defineProperty(fn, "name", { value: "New Name" });
Will do the trick and is the most performant solution. No eval either.
I've been playing around with this for the last 3 hours and finally got it at least somewhat elegant using new Function as suggested on other threads:
/**
* JavaScript Rename Function
* #author Nate Ferrero
* #license Public Domain
* #date Apr 5th, 2014
*/
var renameFunction = function (name, fn) {
return (new Function("return function (call) { return function " + name +
" () { return call(this, arguments) }; };")())(Function.apply.bind(fn));
};
/**
* Test Code
*/
var cls = renameFunction('Book', function (title) {
this.title = title;
});
new cls('One Flew to Kill a Mockingbird');
If you run the above code, you should see the following output to your console:
Book {title: "One Flew to Kill a Mockingbird"}
Combine usage of computed property name to dynamically name a property, and inferred function naming to give our anonymous function that computed property name:
const name = "aDynamicName"
const tmp = {
[name]: function(){
return 42
}
}
const myFunction= tmp[name]
console.log(myFunction) //=> [Function: aDynamicName]
console.log(myFunction.name) //=> 'aDynamicName'
One could use whatever they want for 'name' here, to create a function with whatever name they want.
If this isn't clear, let's break down the two pieces of this technique separately:
Computed Property Names
const name = "myProperty"
const o = {
[name]: 42
}
console.log(o) //=> { myProperty: 42 }
We can see that the property name assigned on o was myProperty, by way of computed property naming. The []'s here cause JS to lookup the value inside the bracket, and to use that for the property name.
Inferred Function Naming
const o = {
myFunction: function(){ return 42 }
}
console.log(o.myFunction) //=> [Function: myFunction]
console.log(o.myFunction.name) //=> 'myFunction'
Here we use inferred function naming. The language looks at the name of wherever the function is being assigned to, & gives the function that inferred name.
We can combine these two techniques, as shown in the beginning. We create an anonymous function, which gets it's name via inferred function naming, from a computed property name, which is the dynamic name we wanted to create. Then we have to extract the newly created function from the object it is embedded inside of.
Example Using Stack Trace
Naming a supplied anonymous function
// Check the error stack trace to see the given name
function runAnonFnWithName(newName, fn) {
const hack = { [newName]: fn };
hack[newName]();
}
runAnonFnWithName("MyNewFunctionName", () => {
throw new Error("Fire!");
});
Although it is ugly, you could cheat via eval():
function copy(parent, name){
name = typeof name==='undefined'?'Foobar':name;
var f = eval('function '+name+'(){};'+name);
f.prototype = parent;
return new f();
}
var parent = {a:50};
var child = copy(parent, 'MyName');
console.log(child); // Shows 'MyName' in Chrome console.
Beware: You can only use names which would be valid as function names!
Addendum: To avoid evaling on every object instantiation, use a cache:
function Cache(fallback){
var cache = {};
this.get = function(id){
if (!cache.hasOwnProperty(id)){
cache[id] = fallback.apply(null, Array.prototype.slice.call(arguments, 1));
}
return cache[id];
}
}
var copy = (function(){
var cache = new Cache(createPrototypedFunction);
function createPrototypedFunction(parent, name){
var f = eval('function '+name+'(){};'+name);
f.prototype = parent;
return f;
}
return function(parent, name){
return new (cache.get(name, parent, typeof name==='undefined'?'Foobar':name));
};
})();
This won't totally solve your problem, but I would suggest overriding the toString method on the class's prototype. For instance:
my_class = function () {}
my_class.prototype.toString = function () { return 'Name of Class'; }
You'll still see the original class name if you enter an instance of my_class directly in the console (I don't think it's possible to do anything about this), but you'll get the nice name in error messages, which I find very helpful. For instance:
a = new my_class()
a.does_not_exist()
Will give the error message: "TypeError: Object Name of Class has no method 'does_not_exist'"
If you want to dynamically create a named function. You can use new Function to create your named function.
function getMutableCopy(fnName,proto) {
var f = new Function(`function ${fnName}(){}; return ${fnName}`)()
f.prototype = proto;
return new f();
}
getMutableCopy("bar",{})
// ▶ bar{}
Similar to #Piercey4 answer, but I had to set the name for the instance as well:
function generateConstructor(newName) {
function F() {
// This is important:
this.name = newName;
};
Object.defineProperty(F, 'name', {
value: newName,
writable: false
});
return F;
}
const MyFunc = generateConstructor('MyFunc');
const instance = new MyFunc();
console.log(MyFunc.name); // prints 'MyFunc'
console.log(instance.name); // prints 'MyFunc'
normally you use window[name] like
var name ="bar";
window["foo"+name] = "bam!";
foobar; // "bam!"
which would lead you to a function like:
function getmc (object, name) {
window[name] = function () {};
window[name].prototype = object;
return new window[name]();
}
but then
foo = function(){};
foobar = getmc(foo, "bar");
foobar; // ▶ window
foobar.name; // foo
x = new bar; x.name; // foo .. not even nija'ing the parameter works
and since you can't eval a return statement (eval("return new name()");), I think you're stuck
I think this is the best way to dynamically set the name of a function :
Function.prototype.setName = function (newName) {
Object.defineProperty(this,'name', {
get : function () {
return newName;
}
});
}
Now you just need to call the setName method
function foo () { }
foo.name; // returns 'foo'
foo.setName('bar');
foo.name; // returns 'bar'
foo.name = 'something else';
foo.name; // returns 'bar'
foo.setName({bar : 123});
foo.name; // returns {bar : 123}
Based on the answer of #josh, this prints in a console REPL, shows in console.log and shows in the debugger tooltip:
var fn = function() {
return 1917;
};
fn.oldToString = fn.toString;
fn.toString = function() {
return "That fine function I wrote recently: " + this.oldToString();
};
var that = fn;
console.log(that);
Inclusion of fn.oldToString() is a magic which makes it work. If I exclude it, nothing works any more.
With ECMAScript2015 (ES2015, ES6) language specification, it is possible to dynamically set a function name without the use of slow and unsafe eval function and without Object.defineProperty method which both corrupts function object and does not work in some crucial aspects anyway.
See, for example, this nameAndSelfBind function that is able to both name anonymous functions and renaming named functions, as well as binding their own bodies to themselves as this and storing references to processed functions to be used in an outer scope (JSFiddle):
(function()
{
// an optional constant to store references to all named and bound functions:
const arrayOfFormerlyAnonymousFunctions = [],
removeEventListenerAfterDelay = 3000; // an auxiliary variable for setTimeout
// this function both names argument function and makes it self-aware,
// binding it to itself; useful e.g. for event listeners which then will be able
// self-remove from within an anonymous functions they use as callbacks:
function nameAndSelfBind(functionToNameAndSelfBind,
name = 'namedAndBoundFunction', // optional
outerScopeReference) // optional
{
const functionAsObject = {
[name]()
{
return binder(...arguments);
}
},
namedAndBoundFunction = functionAsObject[name];
// if no arbitrary-naming functionality is required, then the constants above are
// not needed, and the following function should be just "var namedAndBoundFunction = ":
var binder = function()
{
return functionToNameAndSelfBind.bind(namedAndBoundFunction, ...arguments)();
}
// this optional functionality allows to assign the function to a outer scope variable
// if can not be done otherwise; useful for example for the ability to remove event
// listeners from the outer scope:
if (typeof outerScopeReference !== 'undefined')
{
if (outerScopeReference instanceof Array)
{
outerScopeReference.push(namedAndBoundFunction);
}
else
{
outerScopeReference = namedAndBoundFunction;
}
}
return namedAndBoundFunction;
}
// removeEventListener callback can not remove the listener if the callback is an anonymous
// function, but thanks to the nameAndSelfBind function it is now possible; this listener
// removes itself right after the first time being triggered:
document.addEventListener("visibilitychange", nameAndSelfBind(function(e)
{
e.target.removeEventListener('visibilitychange', this, false);
console.log('\nEvent listener 1 triggered:', e, '\nthis: ', this,
'\n\nremoveEventListener 1 was called; if "this" value was correct, "'
+ e.type + '"" event will not listened to any more');
}, undefined, arrayOfFormerlyAnonymousFunctions), false);
// to prove that deanonymized functions -- even when they have the same 'namedAndBoundFunction'
// name -- belong to different scopes and hence removing one does not mean removing another,
// a different event listener is added:
document.addEventListener("visibilitychange", nameAndSelfBind(function(e)
{
console.log('\nEvent listener 2 triggered:', e, '\nthis: ', this);
}, undefined, arrayOfFormerlyAnonymousFunctions), false);
// to check that arrayOfFormerlyAnonymousFunctions constant does keep a valid reference to
// formerly anonymous callback function of one of the event listeners, an attempt to remove
// it is made:
setTimeout(function(delay)
{
document.removeEventListener('visibilitychange',
arrayOfFormerlyAnonymousFunctions[arrayOfFormerlyAnonymousFunctions.length - 1],
false);
console.log('\nAfter ' + delay + 'ms, an event listener 2 was removed; if reference in '
+ 'arrayOfFormerlyAnonymousFunctions value was correct, the event will not '
+ 'be listened to any more', arrayOfFormerlyAnonymousFunctions);
}, removeEventListenerAfterDelay, removeEventListenerAfterDelay);
})();
I have not seen anyone mention the use of ES6 Proxies. Which in my opinion solve this problem beautifully. So here it is.
function shadow(object, secondObject) {
return new Proxy(object, {
get(target, prop, receiver) {
if (secondObject.hasOwnProperty(prop)) return secondObject[prop];
return Reflect.get(...arguments);
}
})
}
let t=function namedFunction(a,b,c){return a+b+c;}
console.log(t.name)//read only property
let f=shadow(t,{name:"addition"})
console.log(f.name)
I am working on a parser combinator library in JavaScript. For that I want to create functions that can be called like any other functions, but also have member functions that can be called in turn to produce output based on the function they are attached to (e.g. combinators).
I can of course add members to functions like this:
//the functions I want to add additional members to
function hello(x) {
return "Hello " + x;
}
function goodbye(x) {
return "Goodbye " + x;
}
//The function I want as a member of the above functions.
//it creates another function based on the function it is
//attached to.
function double() {
var that = this;
return function(x) {
return that(x) + ", " + that(x);
};
}
//I can attach them manually to the function objects:
hello.double = double;
//calling hello.double()('Joe') results in => "Hello Joe, Hello Joe"
goodbye.double = double;
//calling goodbye.double()('Joe') results in => "Goodbye Joe, Goodbye Joe"
I could create a function that augments all my functions with a double member, but I would have to remember to call it every time I create a Hey, Sayonara, etc. function. Also my greeting functions would have all those members each, directly on the function object, for each instance. I would prefer to put them all in one prototype and make this the prototype of all my greeting functions. The following options don't work either:
replacing hello.__proto__ (nonstandard, won't work in all browsers)
modifiying Function.prototype directly (would add those members to all other functions as well, but they do not make sense there - I only want to call double on a set of my own functions)
Is it even possible to give a function object a custom prototype or am I stuck with modifying each function object I create?
Update: I changed the above example to be more similar to the actual problem I am working on. This is about modyfing function objects not normal objects. The final goal is to enable a comfortable syntax for parser combinators, e.g. (much simplified):
//parses one argument
var arg = …
//parses one function name
var name = …
//parses a function call, e.g. foo(x+y, "test", a*2)
var functionCall = name.then(elem("(")).then(arg.repSep(",")).then(")").into(process(…))
I want to be able to add members to a set of functions so, when these members are called, they return new functions based on the function on which they were called. This is to be used for parser combinators / monadic parsers.
Yes, you can, using setPrototypeOf.
See https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/Object/setPrototypeOf.
function prototype() { }
prototype.double = function() { console.log("double"); };
function myfunc() { }
Object.setPrototypeOf(myfunc, prototype);
myfunc.double();
This is essentially the standardized version of __proto__.
There is no other way to directly create a function with a prototype other than Function.prototype. Consider:
function makeFunc() {
return function x() { };
}
function protofunc { }
protofunc.double = { }...
makeFunc.prototype = protofunc;
new makeFunc()
Unfortunately, by returning a function from the makeFunc constructor, rather than the default this, the makeFunc.prototype is not applied.
Or:
myFunc = Object.create(protofunc, ???);
Normally we think of using Object.create to create an object with a prototype, but in this case, there's no way to specify a function as being the object.
Bottom line: the only alternative is to set the prototype explicitly, which you can do either with __proto__, or setPrototypeOf. This is an ES6 feature. Normal browser support caveats apply. See http://kangax.github.io/compat-table/es6/.
Although I know you asked for a solution without using Function.prototype, I wonder whether you had considered that you can chain conditionally-executing behaviors such that a Function.prototype function like double() will allow a co-existence of different behaviors depending on "class" instance...
// This could also be adapted to itself be on Function.prototype
function chainConditions () {
var args = arguments;
return function () {
for (var i=0, argl = args.length; i < argl; i++) {
var ret = args[i].apply(this, arguments);
if (typeof (ret) !== 'undefined') { // If you want to allow undefined to be returnable, you could instead add this to a try-catch and ignore those which throw exceptions or a certain exception
return ret;
}
}
};
}
Function.prototype.double = function () {
if (this.prototype instanceof Salutation) {
var that = this;
return function(x) {
return that(x) + ", " + that(x);
};
}
};
Function.prototype.double = chainConditions(
function () {
if (this.prototype instanceof Tennis) {
var that = this;
return function(x) {
return that(x) + ", " + that(x);
};
}
},
Function.prototype.double
);
function Salutation () {}
function Hello(x) {
return "Hello " + x;
}
function Goodbye(x) {
return "Goodbye " + x;
}
Goodbye.prototype = new Salutation();
function Tennis () {
}
function TennisPlayer (x) {
return x + ' serve';
}
TennisPlayer.prototype = new Tennis();
alert(TennisPlayer.double()('Forehand')); // Forehand serve, Forehand serve
alert(Goodbye.double()('Yellow Brick Road')); // Goodbye Yellow Brick Road, Goodbye Yellow Brick Road
alert(Hello.double()('Yellow Brick Road')); // does not work as we did not use Hello.prototype = new Salutation();
One should be able to abstract this even further by allowing one function to be used for the class type checking (e.g., grouping all Salutation methods on the Function.prototype together as one type check), and another to accept a list of methods keyed to their conditional behaviors.
While it uses its own API, it is fairly non-obtrusive and can even be made to work with existing methods on the Function.prototype which do not play along by throwing an exception (just be sure to include any pre-existing methods last).
A couple of different options. I think you should be thinking in terms of objects and inheritance instead of functions and globals. In the example above, you are basically implying you want "world" to inherit the set of hello methods. (Or do you want "hello" to inherit "world"?)
You should start by reading this paper here: http://www.crockford.com/javascript/inheritance.html
Here's some simple code that demonstrates inheritance using "prototypal inheritance"
// ---------------
function inherit (obj, base) {
var tmp = function () { };
tmp.prototype = base.prototype;
obj.prototype = new tmp();
obj.prototype.constructor = obj;
};
function HelloSet() {
;
}
HelloSet.prototype.helloA = function() {
return "Hello A " + this.displayName;
};
HelloSet.prototype.helloB = function() {
return "Hello B " + this.displayName;
};
function World(displayName) {
HelloSet.constructor.call(this); // constructor chaining
this.displayName = displayName;
}
inherit(World, HelloSet); // World now has all the methdods of HelloSet
// ---------------
// now let's create some worlds
var earth = new World("Earth");
var mars = new World("Mars");
earth.helloA(); // returns "Hello A Earth"
mars.helloB(); // returns "Hello B Mars"
A short answer to your question would be: Yes.
function Parent() {
// constructor
}
function Child() {
// constructor
}
Child.prototype = new Parent();
Here's how to add methods to your Child class:
Child.prototype.someMethod = function() {
// do something
}
It's been a long time that I've used Javascript in an object-oriented fashion unfortunately, but I believe there are some solutions to make the syntax a little bit clearer.
Does JS support two functions with the same name and different parameters ?
function f1(a, b)
{
// a and b are numbers
}
function f1(a, b, c)
{
// a is a string
//b and c are numbers
}
Can I use those JS function for IE7, FF, Opera with no problem?
JavaScript doesn't support what you would call in other languages method overloading, but there are multiple workarounds, like using the arguments object, to check with how many arguments a function has been invoked:
function f1(a, b, c) {
if (arguments.length == 2) {
// f1 called with two arguments
} else if (arguments.length == 3) {
// f1 called with three arguments
}
}
Additionally you could type-check your arguments, for Number and String primitives is safe to use the typeof operator:
function f1(a, b, c) {
if (typeof a == 'number' && typeof b == 'number') {
// a and b are numbers
} else if (typeof a == 'string' && typeof b == 'number' &&
typeof c == 'number') {
// a is a string, b and c are numbers
}
}
And there are much more sophisticated techniques like the one in the following article, that takes advantage of some JavaScript language features like closures, function application, etc, to mimic method overloading:
JavaScript method overloading
No, you can't use function overloading in JS.
But, you can declare just the version with 3 parameters, and then check whether the third argument === undefined, and provide differentiated behaviour on that basis.
No, that will not work, only the 2nd function will be defined on your page. Here's a source.
Javascript only uses the function that was defined last.
http://weblogs.asp.net/jgalloway/archive/2005/10/02/426345.aspx
You will need to implement your own logic inside the function to determine which parameters were passed in.
No you can't do that ... unless it is OK with you to only have your last definition hold.
You can also use instanceof, example with basic polymorphism.
First create a superclass (ball)
// superclass
function Ball() {
this.play = function() {
alert("Ball throw");
};
}
and now for some subclasses (types of balls)
// subclass
function Basketball() {
this.play = function() {
alert("basketball throw");
};
}
// subclass
function Soccerball() {
this.play = function() {
alert("soccer ball kick/throw");
console.debug("here");
};
}
// subclass
function Baseball() {
this.play = function() {
alert("strike 3 you're out");
console.debug("here");
};
}
Give them Ball functionality, aka set their superclass via prototype
// set subclass functionality
Basketball.prototype = new Ball();
Soccerball.prototype = new Ball();
Baseball.prototype = new Ball();
Some polymorphism (create a bunch of balls and play with them all, but play based on type)
var bunchOfBalls = [new Baseball(), new Soccerball(), new Basketball()];
for (var i = 0; i < bunchOfBalls.length; i++) {
bunchOfBalls[i].play();
}
Now write a function that takes a ball but only want to to work for specific type of balls (mimic function overloading, more or less)
//overloading dependent upon type
function BasketbalOrBaseballOnlyPlay(aBall) {
if (aBall instanceof Basketball) {
//special basketball function
}
if (aBall instanceof Baseball) {
//special baseball function
}
}
If aBall is a Basketball so aBall = new Basketball(); then aBall instanceof Basketball would return true for Basketball and false for baseball but true for Ball.
So aBall instanceof Ball would return true because a Basketball is a Ball.
See code live at http://jsfiddle.net/kLCPB/