CODEWITHSUNDEEP
javascriptrequirejs
Dexygen
Dexygen

Reputation: 12561

Can a require.js module depend on itself

We have two modules that get loaded (with 'define') by require.js:

  1. ds.test.js
  2. ds.js

As you might guess, the former tests the latter. The preamble to ds.test.js is as follows, with some console/logging I've added:

define(["ds", "test", "assert"], function (ds, test, assert) {
    console.log(arguments);
    // the rest is a 'pure' module -- 
    // no executable code outside of a returned object/map of methods

The output from the console/logging being what I expect: [Object, Object, Object]

The preamble (with console/logging) of ds.js is as follows:

define(["ds"], function (ds) {
    console.log(arguments);
    // the rest is a 'pure' module

The output from the console/logging however is: [undefined]

Why would the former (ds.test.js) be able to successfully load ds, but ds.js itself cannot? This causes one of my tests to fail, as one of the methods returned by ds refers to a method within itself, i.e.: 'ds.assoc()'. Interestingly before require.js we used a home-rolled dependency manager, and the test did not fail on the same method -- ds.js was able to refer to itself.

Would this be an issue of a so-called "circular dependency"? In that ds.test.js relies on ds.js, and ds.js relies on itself. If so how might I resolve my issue?

For what it's worth, ds.test.js gets loaded first -- it gets picked up as a global var named "SUITE" by 'test.runner.js', the preamble of which is as follows:

define(["test", SUITE], function (test, suite) {

Then whatever test suite gets loaded (in this cast, ds.test.js) in turn loads the module which it is testing (e.g. "ds")

Some final context is that I've just inherited this code in the last few weeks, and what I'm doing is based on our existing conversion of another application from our home-rolled dependency manager to require.js. So I guess I'm asking that be taken into consideration before any sniping with comments such as "why are you using a global variable"; if you've got suggestions for a concrete alternative, great I look forward to it.

Upvotes: 1

Views: 506

Answers (1)

Serlite
Serlite

Reputation: 12258

(Comment added as an answer by request.)

If ds refers to a method within itself, couldn't you call your example function of assoc() directly, rather than try to use ds.assoc()? (This also eliminates the perceived need for ds to load itself.)

Upvotes: 1

Related Questions