esque OOP in JavaScript and a jQuery fail
I'm working on a project and I'm really trying to write object-oriented JavaScript code. I have just started reading Douglas Crockford's JavaScript: The Good Parts and I'm quickly beginning to realize that writing Java-esque OOP in JavaScript will be a difficult task.
Thus far, I've written something like the following...
// index.html
$(document).ready(function() {
$().SetUpElements();
});
// this is in a different js file
$.fn.SetUpElements = function() {
// do stuff here
$().UpdateElement();
};
// this is in yet another different js file
$.fn.UpdateElement = function() {
// do stuff here
var element = new Element(id, name); // continue doing work
};
function Element(id, name) {
var id = id;
var name = name;
// other stuff
};
... the idea being that I want objects/functions to be refactored and decoupled as much as possible; I want to reuse as much code as I can. I've spread a lot of my code across different .js files with the intention of grouping specific relevant code together, much like if you would write different classes in Java.
As I've been learning more about jQuery, I realized that the notation $.fn.foo = function() { ... }; is actually adding this foo function to the prototype of all jQuery objects. Is this something I should be doing? Am I misusing jQuery somehow?
I would appreciate suggestions on how to improve my approach to OOP in JavaScript and I would love to see references to sources/tutorials/articles/etc... that discuss this topic. Please feel free to provide feedback even if an answer has been selected. I am looking for your advice... this is why I posted :)
** Note: I'm not developing a jQuery plugin. I'm developing a web app and heavily making use of jQuery.
I would say the first way you're creating methods is a misuse of jQuery. The jQuery.fn.foo syntax is generally reserved for functions that act upon a DOM element but you're using them as static functions, by using an empty jQuery object.
If you want to create static functions under the jQuery namespace, you can do:
jQuery.foo = function(){};
then call it via:
jQuery.foo();
instead of:
jQuery.fn.foo = function(){};
which allows you to do:
jQuery('#someElementId').foo();
In terms of OOP. there are many different approaches (module pattern, prototype, factory...). The way I generally approach it, is create a Class as a static function, then invoking it with the keyword new
(function($){
var undefined;
$.ClassName = function(options){
var self = this;
var cfg = $.extend(true, {}, this.defaults, options);
// ********************
// start:private
// ********************
function _init(){
};
// ********************
// start:public
// ********************
this.methodName = function(){
};
_init();
};
$.ClassName.prototype.defaults = {};
})(jQuery);
In terms of reusing functionality, there's a threshold after which decoupling is more detrimental than anything. Make sure you keep the right balance of modularity and organization.
如果它不是一个jQuery插件，我会写这样的东西：
var app = {
init: function(){
app.SetUpElements();
},
SetUpElements: function() {
return 'something';
},
etc: function() {
}
};
$(document).ready(app.init);
参考在JavaScript中做OO，你应该看道格拉斯克罗克福德的高级Javascript课程
链接地址: http://www.djcxy.com/p/17074.html