How do I declare a namespace in JavaScript?

Question

How do I create a namespace in JavaScript so that my objects and functions aren't overwritten by other same-named objects and functions? I've used the following:

if (Foo == null || typeof(Foo) != "object") { var Foo = new Object();}

Is there a more elegant or succinct way of doing this?

Answer 1

I like Jaco Pretorius' solution, but I wanted to make the "this" keyword a bit more useful by pointing it to the module/namespace object. My version of skillet:

(function ($, undefined) {

    console.log(this);

}).call(window.myNamespace = window.myNamespace || {}, jQuery);

Answer 2

You can declare a simple function to provide namespaces.

function namespace(namespace) {
    var object = this, tokens = namespace.split("."), token;

    while (tokens.length > 0) {
        token = tokens.shift();

        if (typeof object[token] === "undefined") {
            object[token] = {};
        }

        object = object[token];
    }

    return object;
}

// Usage example
namespace("foo.bar").baz = "I'm a value!";

Answer 3

This is a follow-up to user106826's link to Namespace.js. It seems the project moved to GitHub. It is now smith/namespacedotjs.

I have been using this simple JavaScript helper for my tiny project and so far it seems to be light yet versatile enough to handle namespacing and loading modules/classes. It would be great if it would allow me to import a package into a namespace of my choice, not just the global namespace... sigh, but that's besides the point.

It allows you to declare the namespace then define objects/modules in that namespace:

Namespace('my.awesome.package');
my.awesome.package.WildClass = {};

Another option is to declare the namespace and its contents at once:

Namespace('my.awesome.package', {
    SuperDuperClass: {
        saveTheDay: function() {
            alert('You are welcome.');
        }
    }
});

For more usage examples, look at the example.js file in the source.

Answer 4

Quite a follow-up of Ionuț G. Stan's answer, but showing the benefits of uncluttered code by using var ClassFirst = this.ClassFirst = function() {...}, which takes advantage of JavaScript's closure scoping for less namespace cluttering for classes in the same namespace.

var Namespace = new function() {
    var ClassFirst = this.ClassFirst = function() {
        this.abc = 123;
    }

    var ClassSecond = this.ClassSecond = function() {
        console.log("Cluttered way to access another class in namespace: ", new Namespace.ClassFirst().abc);
        console.log("Nicer way to access a class in same namespace: ", new ClassFirst().abc);
    }
}

var Namespace2 = new function() {
    var ClassFirst = this.ClassFirst = function() {
        this.abc = 666;
    }

    var ClassSecond = this.ClassSecond = function() {
        console.log("Cluttered way to access another class in namespace: ", new Namespace2.ClassFirst().abc);
        console.log("Nicer way to access a class in same namespace: ", new ClassFirst().abc);
    }
}

new Namespace.ClassSecond()
new Namespace2.ClassSecond()

Output:

Cluttered way to access another class in namespace: 123
Nicer way to access a class in same namespace: 123
Cluttered way to access another class in namespace: 666
Nicer way to access a class in same namespace: 666

Answer 5

Because you may write different files of JavaScript and later combine or not combine them in an application, each needs to be able to recover or construct the namespace object without damaging the work of other files...

One file might intend to use the namespace namespace.namespace1:

namespace = window.namespace || {};
namespace.namespace1 = namespace.namespace1 || {};

namespace.namespace1.doSomeThing = function(){}

Another file might want to use the namespace namespace.namespace2:

namespace = window.namespace || {};
namespace.namespace2 = namespace.namespace2 || {};

namespace.namespace2.doSomeThing = function(){}

These two files can live together or apart without colliding.

Answer 6

The Module pattern was originally defined as a way to provide both private and public encapsulation for classes in conventional software engineering.

When working with the Module pattern, we may find it useful to define a simple template that we use for getting started with it. Here's one that covers name-spacing, public and private variables.

In JavaScript, the Module pattern is used to further emulate the concept of classes in such a way that we're able to include both public/private methods and variables inside a single object, thus shielding particular parts from the global scope. What this results in is a reduction in the likelihood of our function names conflicting with other functions defined in additional scripts on the page.

var myNamespace = (function () {

  var myPrivateVar, myPrivateMethod;

  // A private counter variable
  myPrivateVar = 0;

  // A private function which logs any arguments
  myPrivateMethod = function( foo ) {
      console.log( foo );
  };

  return {

    // A public variable
    myPublicVar: "foo",

    // A public function utilizing privates
    myPublicFunction: function( bar ) {

      // Increment our private counter
      myPrivateVar++;

      // Call our private method using bar
      myPrivateMethod( bar );

    }
  };

})();

Advantages

why is the Module pattern a good choice? For starters, it's a lot cleaner for developers coming from an object-oriented background than the idea of true encapsulation, at least from a JavaScript perspective.

Secondly, it supports private data - so, in the Module pattern, public parts of our code are able to touch the private parts, however the outside world is unable to touch the class's private parts.

Disadvantages

The disadvantages of the Module pattern are that as we access both public and private members differently, when we wish to change visibility, we actually have to make changes to each place the member was used.

We also can't access private members in methods that are added to the object at a later point. That said, in many cases the Module pattern is still quite useful and when used correctly, certainly has the potential to improve the structure of our application.

The Revealing Module Pattern

Now that we're a little more familiar with the module pattern, let’s take a look at a slightly improved version - Christian Heilmann’s Revealing Module pattern.

The Revealing Module pattern came about as Heilmann was frustrated with the fact that he had to repeat the name of the main object when we wanted to call one public method from another or access public variables.He also disliked the Module pattern’s requirement for having to switch to object literal notation for the things he wished to make public.

The result of his efforts was an updated pattern where we would simply define all of our functions and variables in the private scope and return an anonymous object with pointers to the private functionality we wished to reveal as public.

An example of how to use the Revealing Module pattern can be found below

var myRevealingModule = (function () {

        var privateVar = "Ben Cherry",
            publicVar = "Hey there!";

        function privateFunction() {
            console.log( "Name:" + privateVar );
        }

        function publicSetName( strName ) {
            privateVar = strName;
        }

        function publicGetName() {
            privateFunction();
        }


        // Reveal public pointers to
        // private functions and properties

        return {
            setName: publicSetName,
            greeting: publicVar,
            getName: publicGetName
        };

    })();

myRevealingModule.setName( "Paul Kinlan" );

Advantages

This pattern allows the syntax of our scripts to be more consistent. It also makes it more clear at the end of the module which of our functions and variables may be accessed publicly which eases readability.

Disadvantages

A disadvantage of this pattern is that if a private function refers to a public function, that public function can't be overridden if a patch is necessary. This is because the private function will continue to refer to the private implementation and the pattern doesn't apply to public members, only to functions.

Public object members which refer to private variables are also subject to the no-patch rule notes above.