Skip to main content

Anonymous Functions vs Named Functions for Node.js

I am a fan of anonymous functions, it just makes like easier and I find the syntax of passing functions around more expressive. Only problem I have found though is that when you have a bug, anonymous functions can give you a bit of a headache when tracking down what went wrong.


In the first example createServer is passed an anonymous function that gets called back. If something goes wrong you the error message is something like:

C:\Node\imageshare\server.js:14
        route(pathName);
        ^
TypeError: undefined is not a function
    at Server. (C:\Node\imageshare\server.js:14:9)
    at Server.emit (events.js:70:17)
    at HTTPParser.onIncoming (http.js:1610:12)
    at HTTPParser.parserOnHeadersComplete [as onHeadersComplete] (http.js:91:29)

    at Socket.ondata (http.js:1506:22)
    at TCP.onread (net.js:374:27)
Which although is easy enough to track down in this example, you can see that the name of the function is not listed because it doesn't have one... Server.. As the project and file is tiny, it's not the end of the world. However in a world of call backs with anonymous methods I wonder if this would begin to get very tricky in a complex example. 
In the 2nd example, the function that's passed into createServer is named. When the same error happens the name of the function is given....
C:\Node\imageshare\server.js:13
        route(pathname);
              ^
ReferenceError: pathname is not defined
    at Server.process (C:\Node\imageshare\server.js:13:15)
    at Server.emit (events.js:70:17)
    at HTTPParser.onIncoming (http.js:1610:12)
    at HTTPParser.parserOnHeadersComplete [as onHeadersComplete] (http.js:91:29)

    at Socket.ondata (http.js:1506:22)
    at TCP.onread (net.js:374:27)

I wonder if this would make for a much easier life in the long run?

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Making your domain less mutable

This happens regularly to me (and from my anecdotal investigation everyone involved in large / old projects). We need a new piece of functionality. I write it, it's beautiful and I win the internet. I have estimated 8 days (or 22.23 lol-points depending on how you live) and it's only taken 4 days. Ah, but then a very small; mostly ignored and very unimportant detail rears it's cruel head. You need to make it work with the code that exists already. This is normally in the form of saving to some pre-existing entities. Oh dear. You save everything through the various management / service classes that exist already and nothing works. So begins the next couple of days of horror. You find that you didn't set the work = true . Most of my woes in this area are caused by modifications at layer further down (or the stored procedure it finally ends up in) changing the object that I was trying to save or not saving part of the object because of some rule. So many errors
Post a Comment
Read more

Make your objects immutable by default

More about the Good Dojo In my post last week , I discussed creating objects that are instantiated safely. Please go back and read if you are interested. At the end of the post, I mentioned that I'd also written the class so it was immutable when instantiated. This is important!!! I feel like a broken record in repeating this but I am sure at the time of writing your code, you aren't modifying your object all over the place and so are safe in the belief that protecting against mutability is overkill. Please remember though, your code could be around for a hell of a long time. You aren't writing your code for now... you are writing for the next fool that comes along (including you) . Nothing is more upsetting that coming back to fix a bug on some wonderfully crafted code to say "Who has butchered my code?!", but often you were involved at the start of the process. You made the code easy to modify, allowing objects to be used / reused / modified without thi
Post a Comment
Read more

IIS Administration using Microsoft.Web.Administration using F#

A friend had mentioned his joy at using Powershell. I guess this is pretty cool and I don't mind Powershell. I sort of missed the boat a little with it because I haven't done any Windows Administration since I used to look after Windows Server 2000 machines (and possibly a couple of 2003). At that time I had a different arsenal to cause untold woe on my fellow colleagues....VBSCRIPT!!!! Boy could I cause trouble with that. With a combination of that, VBA and SQL I used to love creating spider webs of pure madness, once written the apps were tied together so precariously; one false move and the entire thing would explode.... anyway that's a different story. Back to the Powershell. He was using it to automate IIS (or else I heard what I wanted to so I could try and push F# onto him, who knows?). I have heard various stories of extremely large platform automation scripts being written recently (for example  .net rocks interview with Steve Evans ) and whilst they seem to be g
Post a Comment
Read more