Mongoose and arrow functions - node.js

I am hoping to clear up some of my confusion pertaining to arrow functions and lexical this, my use case with mongoose.
When adding a method to a mongoose Schema, one cannot use an arrow function.
According to this article: https://hackernoon.com/javascript-es6-arrow-functions-and-lexical-this-f2a3e2a5e8c4
"Lexical Scoping just means that it uses this from the code that contains the Arrow Function."
So if I use an arrow function in a mongoose method, why does 'this' not refer to the schema object, whereas a pre-es6 function does? If the schema and arrow function are in the same file, is the lexical scope not bound to the schema?
Thank you!
UserSchema.methods.toJSON = function() {
const user = this;
const userObject = user.toObject();
return _.pick(userObject, ['_id', 'email']);
};

Lexical Scoping just means that it uses this from the code that contains the Arrow Function.
I'll just demonstrate it:
window.answer = 'Unknown'; // `this` equals to `window` in browser (no strict mode)
const object = {
answer: 42,
arrow: () => this.answer,
wrap() {
const arrow = () => this.answer;
return arrow();
},
stillOuter() { return this.arrow();},
method() {return this.answer;},
likeArrow: function() {return this.answer;}.bind(this)
};
console.log(object.arrow(), object.stillOuter(), object.likeArrow()); // Unknown Unknown
console.log(object.method(), object.wrap()); // 42 42
Arrow function's this just belongs to outer context.
So, if your arrow functions will be declared inside of correct object, this will be correct(almost) too.
Look into that workaround:
let tmp = Symbol(); // just to not interfere with something
UserSchema.methods[tmp] = function() {
this.toJson = data => JSON.stringify(data);
// All arrow functions here point into `UserSchema.methods` object
// It will be still `UserSchema.methods` if implementation will copy these methods into other objects or call in the other context
};
UserSchema.methods[tmp]();
delete UserSchema.methods[tmp];

Related

typescript and Nodejs this in controller returning undefined [duplicate]

I have a constructor function which registers an event handler:
function MyConstructor(data, transport) {
this.data = data;
transport.on('data', function () {
alert(this.data);
});
}
// Mock transport object
var transport = {
on: function(event, callback) {
setTimeout(callback, 1000);
}
};
// called as
var obj = new MyConstructor('foo', transport);
However, I'm not able to access the data property of the created object inside the callback. It looks like this does not refer to the object that was created, but to another one.
I also tried to use an object method instead of an anonymous function:
function MyConstructor(data, transport) {
this.data = data;
transport.on('data', this.alert);
}
MyConstructor.prototype.alert = function() {
alert(this.name);
};
but it exhibits the same problems.
How can I access the correct object?
What you should know about this
this (aka "the context") is a special keyword inside each function and its value only depends on how the function was called, not how/when/where it was defined. It is not affected by lexical scopes like other variables (except for arrow functions, see below). Here are some examples:
function foo() {
console.log(this);
}
// normal function call
foo(); // `this` will refer to `window`
// as object method
var obj = {bar: foo};
obj.bar(); // `this` will refer to `obj`
// as constructor function
new foo(); // `this` will refer to an object that inherits from `foo.prototype`
To learn more about this, have a look at the MDN documentation.
How to refer to the correct this
Use arrow functions
ECMAScript 6 introduced arrow functions, which can be thought of as lambda functions. They don't have their own this binding. Instead, this is looked up in scope just like a normal variable. That means you don't have to call .bind. That's not the only special behavior they have, please refer to the MDN documentation for more information.
function MyConstructor(data, transport) {
this.data = data;
transport.on('data', () => alert(this.data));
}
Don't use this
You actually don't want to access this in particular, but the object it refers to. That's why an easy solution is to simply create a new variable that also refers to that object. The variable can have any name, but common ones are self and that.
function MyConstructor(data, transport) {
this.data = data;
var self = this;
transport.on('data', function() {
alert(self.data);
});
}
Since self is a normal variable, it obeys lexical scope rules and is accessible inside the callback. This also has the advantage that you can access the this value of the callback itself.
Explicitly set this of the callback - part 1
It might look like you have no control over the value of this because its value is set automatically, but that is actually not the case.
Every function has the method .bind [docs], which returns a new function with this bound to a value. The function has exactly the same behavior as the one you called .bind on, only that this was set by you. No matter how or when that function is called, this will always refer to the passed value.
function MyConstructor(data, transport) {
this.data = data;
var boundFunction = (function() { // parenthesis are not necessary
alert(this.data); // but might improve readability
}).bind(this); // <- here we are calling `.bind()`
transport.on('data', boundFunction);
}
In this case, we are binding the callback's this to the value of MyConstructor's this.
Note: When a binding context for jQuery, use jQuery.proxy [docs] instead. The reason to do this is so that you don't need to store the reference to the function when unbinding an event callback. jQuery handles that internally.
Set this of the callback - part 2
Some functions/methods which accept callbacks also accept a value to which the callback's this should refer to. This is basically the same as binding it yourself, but the function/method does it for you. Array#map [docs] is such a method. Its signature is:
array.map(callback[, thisArg])
The first argument is the callback and the second argument is the value this should refer to. Here is a contrived example:
var arr = [1, 2, 3];
var obj = {multiplier: 42};
var new_arr = arr.map(function(v) {
return v * this.multiplier;
}, obj); // <- here we are passing `obj` as second argument
Note: Whether or not you can pass a value for this is usually mentioned in the documentation of that function/method. For example, jQuery's $.ajax method [docs] describes an option called context:
This object will be made the context of all Ajax-related callbacks.
Common problem: Using object methods as callbacks/event handlers
Another common manifestation of this problem is when an object method is used as callback/event handler. Functions are first-class citizens in JavaScript and the term "method" is just a colloquial term for a function that is a value of an object property. But that function doesn't have a specific link to its "containing" object.
Consider the following example:
function Foo() {
this.data = 42,
document.body.onclick = this.method;
}
Foo.prototype.method = function() {
console.log(this.data);
};
The function this.method is assigned as click event handler, but if the document.body is clicked, the value logged will be undefined, because inside the event handler, this refers to the document.body, not the instance of Foo.
As already mentioned at the beginning, what this refers to depends on how the function is called, not how it is defined.
If the code was like the following, it might be more obvious that the function doesn't have an implicit reference to the object:
function method() {
console.log(this.data);
}
function Foo() {
this.data = 42,
document.body.onclick = this.method;
}
Foo.prototype.method = method;
The solution is the same as mentioned above: If available, use .bind to explicitly bind this to a specific value
document.body.onclick = this.method.bind(this);
or explicitly call the function as a "method" of the object, by using an anonymous function as callback / event handler and assign the object (this) to another variable:
var self = this;
document.body.onclick = function() {
self.method();
};
or use an arrow function:
document.body.onclick = () => this.method();
Here are several ways to access the parent context inside a child context -
You can use the bind() function.
Store a reference to context/this inside another variable (see the below example).
Use ES6 Arrow functions.
Alter the code, function design, and architecture - for this you should have command over design patterns in JavaScript.
1. Use the bind() function
function MyConstructor(data, transport) {
this.data = data;
transport.on('data', ( function () {
alert(this.data);
}).bind(this) );
}
// Mock transport object
var transport = {
on: function(event, callback) {
setTimeout(callback, 1000);
}
};
// called as
var obj = new MyConstructor('foo', transport);
If you are using Underscore.js - http://underscorejs.org/#bind
transport.on('data', _.bind(function () {
alert(this.data);
}, this));
2. Store a reference to context/this inside another variable
function MyConstructor(data, transport) {
var self = this;
this.data = data;
transport.on('data', function() {
alert(self.data);
});
}
3. Arrow function
function MyConstructor(data, transport) {
this.data = data;
transport.on('data', () => {
alert(this.data);
});
}
It's all in the "magic" syntax of calling a method:
object.property();
When you get the property from the object and call it in one go, the object will be the context for the method. If you call the same method, but in separate steps, the context is the global scope (window) instead:
var f = object.property;
f();
When you get the reference of a method, it's no longer attached to the object. It's just a reference to a plain function. The same happens when you get the reference to use as a callback:
this.saveNextLevelData(this.setAll);
That's where you would bind the context to the function:
this.saveNextLevelData(this.setAll.bind(this));
If you are using jQuery you should use the $.proxy method instead, as bind is not supported in all browsers:
this.saveNextLevelData($.proxy(this.setAll, this));
You should know about "this" Keyword.
As per my view you can implement "this" in three ways
(Self|Arrow function|Bind Method)
A function's this keyword behaves a little differently in JavaScript compared to other languages.
It also has some differences between strict mode and non-strict mode.
In most cases, the value of this is determined by how a function is called.
It can't be set by assignment during execution, and it may be different each time the function is called.
ES5 introduced the bind() method to set the value of a function's this regardless of how it's called,
And ES2015 introduced arrow functions that don't provide their own this binding (it retains this value of the enclosing lexical context).
Method1: Self - Self is being used to maintain a reference to the original this even as the context is changing. It's a technique often used in event handlers (especially in closures).
Reference: this
function MyConstructor(data, transport) {
this.data = data;
var self = this;
transport.on('data', function () {
alert(self.data);
});
}
Method2: Arrow function - An arrow function expression is a syntactically compact alternative to a regular function expression, although without its own bindings to the this, arguments, super, or new.target keywords.
Arrow function expressions are ill-suited as methods, and they cannot be used as constructors.
Reference: Arrow function expressions
function MyConstructor(data, transport) {
this.data = data;
transport.on('data',()=> {
alert(this.data);
});
}
Method 3: Bind - The bind() method creates a new function that, when called, has its this keyword set to the provided value with a given sequence of arguments preceding any provided when the new function is called.
Reference: Function.prototype.bind()
function MyConstructor(data, transport) {
this.data = data;
transport.on('data',(function() {
alert(this.data);
}).bind(this);
The trouble with "context"
The term "context" is sometimes used to refer to the object referenced by this. Its use is inappropriate, because it doesn't fit either semantically or technically with ECMAScript's this.
"Context" means the circumstances surrounding something that adds meaning, or some preceding and following information that gives extra meaning. The term "context" is used in ECMAScript to refer to execution context, which is all the parameters, scope, and this within the scope of some executing code.
This is shown in ECMA-262 section 10.4.2:
Set the ThisBinding to the same value as the ThisBinding of the
calling execution context
Which clearly indicates that this is part of an execution context.
An execution context provides the surrounding information that adds meaning to the code that is being executed. It includes much more information than just the thisBinding.
The value of this isn't "context". It's just one part of an execution context. It's essentially a local variable that can be set by the call to any object and in strict mode, to any value at all.
First, you need to have a clear understanding of scope and behaviour of the this keyword in the context of scope.
this & scope:
There are two types of scope in JavaScript. They are:
Global Scope
Function Scope
In short, global scope refers to the window object. Variables declared in a global scope are accessible from anywhere.
On the other hand, function scope resides inside of a function. A variable declared inside a function cannot be accessed from the outside world normally.
The this keyword in the global scope refers to the window object. this inside a function also refers to the window object. So this will always refer to the window until we find a way to manipulate this to indicate a context of our own choosing.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- -
- Global Scope -
- (globally "this" refers to window object) -
- -
- function outer_function(callback){ -
- -
- // Outer function scope -
- // Inside the outer function, the "this" keyword -
- // refers to window object -
- callback() // "this" inside callback also refers to the window object -
- } -
- -
- function callback_function(){ -
- -
- // Function to be passed as callback -
- -
- // Here "THIS" refers to the window object also -
- } -
- -
- outer_function(callback_function) -
- // Invoke with callback -
- -
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Different ways to manipulate this inside callback functions:
Here I have a constructor function called Person. It has a property called name and four method called sayNameVersion1, sayNameVersion2, sayNameVersion3, and sayNameVersion4. All four of them has one specific task. Accept a callback and invoke it. The callback has a specific task which is to log the name property of an instance of Person constructor function.
function Person(name){
this.name = name
this.sayNameVersion1 = function(callback){
callback.bind(this)()
}
this.sayNameVersion2 = function(callback){
callback()
}
this.sayNameVersion3 = function(callback){
callback.call(this)
}
this.sayNameVersion4 = function(callback){
callback.apply(this)
}
}
function niceCallback(){
// Function to be used as callback
var parentObject = this
console.log(parentObject)
}
Now let's create an instance from person constructor and invoke different versions of sayNameVersionX (X refers to 1,2,3,4) method with niceCallback to see how many ways we can manipulate the this inside callback to refer to the person instance.
var p1 = new Person('zami') // Create an instance of Person constructor
bind:
What bind do is to create a new function with the this keyword set to the provided value.
sayNameVersion1 and sayNameVersion2 use bind to manipulate this of the callback function.
this.sayNameVersion1 = function(callback){
callback.bind(this)()
}
this.sayNameVersion2 = function(callback){
callback()
}
The first one binds this with a callback inside the method itself. And for the second one, the callback is passed with the object bound to it.
p1.sayNameVersion1(niceCallback) // pass simply the callback and bind happens inside the sayNameVersion1 method
p1.sayNameVersion2(niceCallback.bind(p1)) // uses bind before passing callback
call:
The first argument of the call method is used as this inside the function that is invoked with call attached to it.
sayNameVersion3 uses call to manipulate the this to refer to the person object that we created, instead of the window object.
this.sayNameVersion3 = function(callback){
callback.call(this)
}
And it is called like the following:
p1.sayNameVersion3(niceCallback)
apply:
Similar to call, the first argument of apply refers to the object that will be indicated by the this keyword.
sayNameVersion4 uses apply to manipulate this to refer to a person object
this.sayNameVersion4 = function(callback){
callback.apply(this)
}
And it is called like the following. Simply the callback is passed,
p1.sayNameVersion4(niceCallback)
We can not bind this to setTimeout(), as it always executes with the global object (Window). If you want to access the this context in the callback function then by using bind() to the callback function, we can achieve it as:
setTimeout(function(){
this.methodName();
}.bind(this), 2000);
The question revolves around how the this keyword behaves in JavaScript. this behaves differently as below,
The value of this is usually determined by a function execution context.
In the global scope, this refers to the global object (the window object).
If strict mode is enabled for any function then the value of this will be undefined as in strict mode, global object refers to undefined in place of the window object.
The object that is standing before the dot is what the this keyword will be bound to.
We can set the value of this explicitly with call(), bind(), and apply()
When the new keyword is used (a constructor), this is bound to the new object being created.
Arrow functions don’t bind this — instead, this is bound lexically (i.e., based on the original context)
As most of the answers suggest, we can use the arrow function or bind() Method or Self var. I would quote a point about lambdas (arrow function) from Google JavaScript Style Guide
Prefer using arrow functions over f.bind(this), and especially over
goog.bind(f, this). Avoid writing const self = this. Arrow functions
are particularly useful for callbacks, which sometimes pass unexpectedly
additional arguments.
Google clearly recommends using lambdas rather than bind or const self = this
So the best solution would be to use lambdas as below,
function MyConstructor(data, transport) {
this.data = data;
transport.on('data', () => {
alert(this.data);
});
}
References:
https://medium.com/tech-tajawal/javascript-this-4-rules-7354abdb274c
arrow-functions-vs-bind
Currently there is another approach possible if classes are used in code.
With support of class fields, it's possible to make it the following way:
class someView {
onSomeInputKeyUp = (event) => {
console.log(this); // This refers to the correct value
// ....
someInitMethod() {
//...
someInput.addEventListener('input', this.onSomeInputKeyUp)
For sure under the hood it's all the old good arrow function that binds context, but in this form it looks much more clear that explicit binding.
Since it's a Stage 3 Proposal, you will need Babel and appropriate Babel plugin to process it as for now (08/2018).
I was facing a problem with Ngx line chart xAxisTickFormatting function which was called from HTML like this: [xAxisTickFormatting]="xFormat".
I was unable to access my component's variable from the function declared. This solution helped me to resolve the issue to find the correct this.
Instead of using the function like this:
xFormat (value): string {
return value.toString() + this.oneComponentVariable; //gives wrong result
}
Use this:
xFormat = (value) => {
// console.log(this);
// now you have access to your component variables
return value + this.oneComponentVariable
}
Another approach, which is the standard way since DOM2 to bind this within the event listener, that let you always remove the listener (among other benefits), is the handleEvent(evt) method from the EventListener interface:
var obj = {
handleEvent(e) {
// always true
console.log(this === obj);
}
};
document.body.addEventListener('click', obj);
Detailed information about using handleEvent can be found here: DOM handleEvent: a cross-platform standard since year 2000
Some other people have touched on how to use the .bind() method, but specifically here is how you can use it with .then() if anyone is having trouble getting them to work together:
someFunction()
.then(function(response) {
//'this' wasn't accessible here before but now it is
}.bind(this))
As mentioned in the comments, an alternative would be to use an arrow function that doesn't have its own 'this' value
someFunction()
.then((response)=>{
//'this' was always accessible here
})
this in JavaScript:
The value of this in JavaScript is 100% determined by how a function is called, and not how it is defined. We can relatively easily find the value of this by the 'left of the dot rule':
When the function is created using the function keyword the value of this is the object left of the dot of the function which is called
If there is no object left of the dot then the value of this inside a function is often the global object (global in Node.js and window in a browser). I wouldn't recommend using the this keyword here because it is less explicit than using something like window!
There exist certain constructs like arrow functions and functions created using the Function.prototype.bind() a function that can fix the value of this. These are exceptions of the rule, but they are really helpful to fix the value of this.
Example in Node.js
module.exports.data = 'module data';
// This outside a function in node refers to module.exports object
console.log(this);
const obj1 = {
data: "obj1 data",
met1: function () {
console.log(this.data);
},
met2: () => {
console.log(this.data);
},
};
const obj2 = {
data: "obj2 data",
test1: function () {
console.log(this.data);
},
test2: function () {
console.log(this.data);
}.bind(obj1),
test3: obj1.met1,
test4: obj1.met2,
};
obj2.test1();
obj2.test2();
obj2.test3();
obj2.test4();
obj1.met1.call(obj2);
Output:
Let me walk you through the outputs one by one (ignoring the first log starting from the second):
this is obj2 because of the left of the dot rule, we can see how test1 is called obj2.test1();. obj2 is left of the dot and thus the this value.
Even though obj2 is left of the dot, test2 is bound to obj1 via the bind() method. The this value is obj1.
obj2 is left of the dot from the function which is called: obj2.test3(). Therefore obj2 will be the value of this.
In this case: obj2.test4() obj2 is left of the dot. However, arrow functions don't have their own this binding. Therefore it will bind to the this value of the outer scope which is the module.exports an object which was logged in the beginning.
We can also specify the value of this by using the call function. Here we can pass in the desired this value as an argument, which is obj2 in this case.

node.js: export a normal function or arrow function?

I am trying to export a function in a .js file using both normal or arrow function. But I don't understand which is recommended.
Export normal function
module.exports = function(id) {
console.log(id);
};
Export an arrow function
const test = id => {
console.log(id);
}
module.exports = test;
Below are few questions I have in my mind.
If normal function is recommended over an arrow function, then why I
am not recommended to use arrow function.
If arrow function is recommended over normal function, then why I am not recommended to use normal function.
How can I understand the recommended one, especially in this scenario of exporting a function?
These two snippets aren't identical. First snippet results in anonymous function, while second snippet results in named function, require('...').name === 'test' (this may be useful for debugging).
A more suitable comparison is
module.exports = function test(id) {
console.log(id);
};
vs
const test = id => {
console.log(id);
}
module.exports = test;
There's no difference between these arrow and regular function in such case because they don't use features that are specific to them (e.g. this context).
Anonymous arrow function takes less characters to type but this benefit disappears when there's a need to give a function a name via temporary test variable. They also may result in lesser memory footprint, though this concern can be ignored because the difference is negligible.
Also, named arrow functions can result in more verbose output than regular functions definitions if they are transpiled to ES5:
const test = () => {}
is transpiled to
var test = function test() {}
While it could be:
function test() {}
This isn't a concern for Node.js or other ES6 environment.
TL;DR: if a function needs to have a name for debugging or other purposes, it makes sense to use:
module.exports = function test(id) {
console.log(id);
};
If a function doesn't need a name, it's:
module.exports = id => {
console.log(id);
};
This is true for functions that don't use features specific to these function types.
const App = () => console.log("This is an app.");
export default App;
OR
export const App = () => console.log("This is an app.");

sinon stub namespaced function

I'm having some issues using sinon stubs and it may stem from how I'm implementing namespacing on the module that I'm looking to stub. Methods directly defined on the prototype are stubbed as I would expect.
...my module.js
const Constructor = require('./constructor') //...just exports a singleton
/* Need to namespace some of my functions and retain the `this` context */
Object.defineProperty(Constructor.prototype, 'es', {
get: function() {
return {
method: require('./implementations/doesSomething.js').bind(this)
}
}
});
module.exports = Constructor;
/* ...testFile.js */
const Constructor = require('./constructor');
const instance = new Constructor();
const sinon = require('sinon');
sinon.stub(instance.es, 'method', function() {
return 'hijacked original method'
});
As mentioned on the Sinon issue tracker, the problem here is that using a plain Object.defineProperty(obj, 'prop') call does something else than plainly creating it using assignment (obj['prop'] = ...).
Generally, if you try defining your property without Object.defineProperty it will be stubbable, but using defineProperty (without creating a special configuration) will make it impossible to stub the property. The reason is simply that the default values for writeable and configurable are false! You cannot delete them or change them. And if you can't do that, then Sinon won't help you. So, generally, you need to add writeable: true, configurable: true in your property definition.
Now there was one more thing I forgot to answer originally:
You are not trying to wrap a function on Constructor.prototype.es.method - what you are trying to wrap is the function on the object returned by the getter on the property for es. That will never work. Why? Simply because the returned object is never the same. You are creating a new object around method each time. If you really need to replace/stub the method property, you actually need to replace the entire Constructor.prototype.es property instead. If you need this namespacing, you can vastly simplify this, and also enable stubbing, like this:
Constructor.prototype.es = {};
Object.defineProperty(Constructor.prototype.es, 'method', {
get: function() {
return someFunction.bind(this);
},
writeable: true,
configurable:true
}
An expanded, fully working example (Gist for download):
// constructor.js
const someFunction = function(){
return this.value;
}
function Constructor(){ };
Constructor.prototype.es = { value : 100 };
Object.defineProperty(Constructor.prototype.es, 'method', {
get: function() {
return someFunction.bind(this);
},
writeable: true,
configurable:true
});
// test.js
const instance = new Constructor();
console.log(instance.es.method()) // => 100
// using this won't work:
// sinon.stub(instance.__proto__.es, 'method').returns(42);
// because the getter is returning a _new_ function each time
// therefore you need to attack the actual getter function:
const stub = sinon.stub(instance.__proto__.es, 'method').value(()=>42);
console.log(instance.es.method()) // => 42
stub.get(()=>()=>84);
console.log(instance.es.method()) // => 84
stub.restore();
console.log(instance.es.method()) // => 100
// the above is working on the prototype, can't we do this on the instance?
// yes, we can, but remember that the `es` object is shared, so we
// can avoid modifying it by shadowing it further down the prototype
instance.es = { method: sinon.stub().returns(256) };
console.log(instance.es.method()) // => 256
delete instance.es
console.log(instance.es.method()) // => 100
<script src="https://unpkg.com/sinon#2.3.5/pkg/sinon.js"></script>

Extending Node.js Modules with OOP

Am I missing something, or is it just not possible to extend arbitrary Node modules like you would, say, a Java class?
Concrete example:
I need passport-remember-me to expose the req object to the _issue method. What I tried to do was to extend that function (RememberMe.Strategy), modify the _issue function, then delegate to the original parent class' function for the actual business logic:
// 1: Extend RememberMeStrategy
function IWillRememberYou (options, verify, issue) {
RememberMeStrategy.call(this, options, verify, issue);
}
util.inherits(RememberMeStrategy, IWillRememberYou);
// 2: Override some method
IWillRememberYou.prototype.authenticate = (req, options) => {
// Save original function
const issue = this._issue;
// Wrap the supplied callback so it can now be sent extra args
this._issue = (user, issued) => {
// Send in additional parameter
issue(req, user, issued);
};
};
What this gives me is an empty this context inside IWillRememberYou.authenticate as well as inside RememberMeStragety.authenticate. Why is this happening??
What the parent class looks like (the third-party Node module)
function Strategy(options, verify, issue) {
// ...
passport.Strategy.call(this);
// ...
this._issue = issue;
}
util.inherits(Strategy, passport.Strategy);
Strategy.prototype.authenticate = function(req, options) {
// ...
// My end goal is to send (req, user, issued) to that callback
this._issue(user, issued);
};
Don't use arrow functions when doing OO. That's because arrow functions are deliberately designed to break how this works. Instead do:
IWillRememberYou.prototype.authenticate = function (req, options) {
/* .. */
};
Remember, with arrow functions you basically bind this to the context where the function is defined. If you defined it outside of any function then this will be the global object or undefined if in strict mode.
What this boils down to is that arrow functions breaks inheritance.

Propogation of *this* in nested function calls in Backbone.js

I started using backbone.js recently for a game. I used model to create Timer as follows:
var Timer = Backbone.Model.extend({
defaults: {
'hh':00, 'mm':05, 'ss':00
},
initialize: function() {
},
countDownOnce: function() {
// Count down the time by 1 sec
},
run1: function() {
this.countDownOnce();
}
run2: function() {
setInterval(this.countDownOnce, 1000);
}
});
The countDownOnce function, if called directly as in run1, works fine.
But if the function is passed as an argument to some built-in function, say setInterval as in the run2 function, the value of this is lost.
How to propagate this pointer to the built-in functions?
The Backbone docs have a useful section on binding "this".
Basically, Underscore provides a couple of very useful functions, _.bind and _.bindAll, which help you more easily manage 'this's context.
...
initialize: function() {
_.bindAll(this, 'countDownOnce' //, and whatever other functions you want bound)
}),
...
This will make sure that no matter what context it's called from, the 'this' inside countDownOnce refers to your Timer instance.
One way to do this is using call and apply. For example:
run2: function() {
setInterval(this.countDownOnce.call, 1000, this);
}
Also note that passing a closure/function reference with arguments to setTimeout() and setInterval() requires some manual hacks to work correctly in IE.
this is how javascript was designed (pun intended :)
Basically 'this' binds to the current context so if in a function/method call like this:
var Data = function(name) {
this.name = name;
}
var myData = new Data("viky");
would refer to the name element "inside" Data (i.e., myData in this case)
Now if you had the following:
var Data = function(name) {
function morphName(anotherName) {
//and if you call this like this ;)
alert(this.name); //undefined
}
}
the inner function morphName is bound to the 'current' context i.e., the outer function. In javascript everything is an object, including functions. So the outer (anonymous) function doesn't have a member called name! (makes sense?)
In order to do that most people use the following (by convention):
var Data = function(name) {
var that = this; //capture current context. Some prefer self = this;
function morphName(anotherName) {
//then you access name like that ;)
alert(that.name);
}
}
I suggest you read about javascript closures and scopes to understand this and that :D

Resources