CODEWITHSUNDEEP
javascriptanonymous-function
Rich Bradshaw
Rich Bradshaw

Reputation: 72975

Binding anonymous functions all over the place

I generally write code that looks like this (but with many more handlers).

$(document).ready(function() {

    $("#next").click(function() {
        doStuff();
    });

    $("#prev").click(function() {
        doSomeOtherStuff();
    });

    $("#link").hover(function() {
        doSomeTotallyOtherStuff();
    });
});

Is this the best way of doing this? Should I do it differently? Paul Irish's presentation suggests it's a bad idea. Is that true?

Upvotes: 1

Views: 665

Answers (3)

ScottE
ScottE

Reputation: 21630

We like to use the object literal pattern and named functions. I'd rewrite your example like this:

$(function() {
  Example.somegrouping.init();
});

var Example.somegrouping = {
  init: function() {
    // set up listeners
    $("#next").click(this.onNextClick);
    $("#prev").click(this.onPrevClick);
    $("#link").hover(this.onLinkHover);
  },
  onNextClick: function() {
    // do some stuff
  },
  onPrevClick: function() {
    // do some stuff
  },
  onLinkHover: function() {
    // do some stuff
  }    
};

Why? Well, it makes it easier to reuse event handlers in other places without resorting to triggers. The naming of the function can help self-document your code. Testing/debugging is easier. The object literal only adds one entry to the global namespace, so there is little chance for collisions with other scripts your page might be using.

Upvotes: 3

cthom06
cthom06

Reputation: 9635

This should be fine as long you don't do it in a loop or some other code that runs more than once (i.e. a recurring function call). Otherwise there's not much difference between one anon function and one named function. it's when you have 100 identical anonymous functions that's a problem.

ex:

$("#someID").click(function(){})

is okay,

for (var i in somelistofIDs) {
    $(i).click(function(){})
}

is not, because you've created 100 anonymous functions instead of one named function.

EDIT

of course, if you're wrapping a single function call in a closure, you're doing it wrong, you can just pass the function itself.

Upvotes: 0

Pointy
Pointy

Reputation: 413826

One reason that it's useful to define your functions the old boring way is that you get names to look at in stack traces.

$(function() {
  function nextClickHandler() { ... };

  $('#next-button').click(nextClickHandler);
});

It's not safe to use a function name in a function expression:

  $('#next-button').click(function nextClickHandler() { // DO NOT DO THIS
  });

which is sort-of unfortunate but there you go.

Upvotes: 0

Related Questions