I defined two functions for array:
Array.prototype.remove = function(obj) {
var i = this.length;
while (i--) {
if (this[i] === obj) {
this.removeAt(i);
}
}
};
Array.prototype.removeAll = function(array2) {
array2.forEach(function(item) {
this.remove(item); // remove not found!!
});
}
But in the removeAll
function, it reports function remove is not found
. I fix it like this:
Array.prototype.removeAll = function(array2) {
var outer = this;
array2.forEach(function(item) {
outer.remove(item);
});
}
But it's ugly. Is there a better way?
Passing this
via a different variable as you do is the idiomatic approach. There is nothing ugly about it. (It is more common to call the variable that
or self
though)
By passing next one argument to forEach which will be context of this
in callback function, In your case this
refers to window object.
Array.prototype.removeAll = function(array2) {
array2.forEach(function(item) {
this.remove(item);
},this);
}
An alternative to using bind (if you need to support old browsers and don't wish to extend Function.prototype
) is to simply wrap your callback in an immidate function and feed this
in as an argument like this:
Array.prototype.removeAll = function(array2) {
array2.forEach(function(outer){
return function(item) {
outer.remove(item);
};}(this));
}
or you can write a simple curry utility function and use like this
function curry() {
var fn = Array.prototype.shift.call(arguments),
args = Array.prototype.slice.call(arguments);
return function curryed() {
return fn.apply(this, args.concat(Array.prototype.slice.call(arguments)));
};
};
Array.prototype.removeAll = function(array2) {
array2.forEach(curry(function(item) {
outer.remove(item);
},this));
}
If you don't mind extending Function.prototype
you can use bind as already described by others you can find an excellent compatibility extension on MDN here: https://developer.mozilla.org/en/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/Function/bind
There is Function.bind
and similar.
array2.forEach((function(item) {
this.remove(item);
}).bind(this));
It's not technically the same, as the previous the "inner this" is now shadowed/lost (and a new wrapper function is created), but it works nicely in some contexts.
For the most part, I prefer the standard var self = this
...
Happy coding.
The technical post webpages of this site follow the CC BY-SA 4.0 protocol. If you need to reprint, please indicate the site URL or the original address.Any question please contact:yoyou2525@163.com.