最近我在JavaScript中遇到了一个简单的Command模式实现,它使用函数作为对象而不是纯对象来定义功能:
var CommandManager = (function() {
function CommandManager() {}
CommandManager.executed = [];
CommandManager.unexecuted = [];
CommandManager.execute = function execute(cmd) {
cmd.execute();
CommandManager.executed.push(cmd);
};
CommandManager.undo = function undo() {
var cmd1 = CommandManager.executed.pop();
if (cmd1 !== undefined){
if (cmd1.unexecute !== undefined){
cmd1.unexecute();
}
CommandManager.unexecuted.push(cmd1);
}
};
CommandManager.redo = function redo() {
var cmd2 = CommandManager.unexecuted.pop();
if (cmd2 === undefined){
cmd2 = CommandManager.executed.pop();
CommandManager.executed.push(cmd2);
CommandManager.executed.push(cmd2);
}
if (cmd2 !== undefined){
cmd2.execute();
CommandManager.executed.push(cmd2);
}
};
return CommandManager;
})();
和用法:
CommandManager.execute({
execute: function(){
// do something
},
unexecute: function(){
// undo something
}
});
//call unexecute of prev. command
CommandManager.undo();
//call execute of prev. command
CommandManager.redo();
我的问题是,以这种方式定义CommandManager函数是否有任何优势,而不是直接定义对象文字的属性并将其分配回var CommandManager
答案 0 :(得分:1)
唯一用途就是你有一个绝对没有的功能:
CommandManager(); // does nothing, returns undefined
除此之外,您还可以将代码编写为对象文字,并使用this
来避免它依赖于自己的名称:
var CommandManager = {
executed: [],
unexecuted: [],
execute: function execute(cmd) {
cmd.execute();
this.executed.push(cmd);
},
undo: function undo() {
var cmd1 = this.executed.pop();
if (cmd1 !== undefined){
if (cmd1.unexecute !== undefined){
cmd1.unexecute();
}
this.unexecuted.push(cmd1);
}
},
redo: function redo() {
var cmd2 = this.unexecuted.pop();
if (cmd2 === undefined){
cmd2 = this.executed.pop();
this.executed.push(cmd2);
this.executed.push(cmd2);
}
if (cmd2 !== undefined){
cmd2.execute();
this.executed.push(cmd2);
}
}
}