JavaScript private methods

Question

To make a JavaScript class with a public method I'd do something like:

function Restaurant() {}

Restaurant.prototype.buy_food = function(){
   // something here
}

Restaurant.prototype.use_restroom = function(){
   // something here
}

That way users of my class can:

var restaurant = new Restaurant();
restaurant.buy_food();
restaurant.use_restroom();

How do I create a private method that can be called by the buy_food and use_restroom methods but not externally by users of the class?

In other words, I want my method implementation to be able to do:

Restaurant.prototype.use_restroom = function() {
   this.private_stuff();
}

But this shouldn't work:

var r = new Restaurant();
r.private_stuff();

How do I define private_stuff as a private method so both of these hold true?

I've read Doug Crockford's writeup a few times but it doesn't seem like "private" methods can be called by public methods and "privileged" methods can be called externally.

Answer 1

You can do it, but the downside is that it can't be part of the prototype:

function Restaurant() {
    var myPrivateVar;

    var private_stuff = function() {  // Only visible inside Restaurant()
        myPrivateVar = "I can set this here!";
    }

    this.use_restroom = function() {  // use_restroom is visible to all
        private_stuff();
    }

    this.buy_food = function() {   // buy_food is visible to all
        private_stuff();
    }
}

Answer 2

Using self invoking function and call

JavaScript uses prototypes and does't have classes (or methods for that matter) like Object Oriented languages. A JavaScript developer need to think in JavaScript.

Wikipedia quote:

Unlike many object-oriented languages, there is no distinction between a function definition and a method definition. Rather, the distinction occurs during function calling; when a function is called as a method of an object, the function's local this keyword is bound to that object for that invocation.

Solution using a self invoking function and the call function to call the private "method" :

var MyObject = (function () {
    
  // Constructor
  function MyObject(foo) {
    this._foo = foo;
  }

  function privateFun(prefix) {
    return prefix + this._foo;
  }
    
  MyObject.prototype.publicFun = function () {
    return privateFun.call(this, ">>");
  }
    
  return MyObject;

}());

var myObject = new MyObject("bar");
myObject.publicFun();      // Returns ">>bar"
myObject.privateFun(">>"); // ReferenceError: private is not defined

The call function allows us to call the private function with the appropriate context (this).

Simpler with Node.js

If you are using Node.js, you don't need the IIFE because you can take advantage of the module loading system:

function MyObject(foo) {
  this._foo = foo;
}
    
function privateFun(prefix) {
  return prefix + this._foo;
}

MyObject.prototype.publicFun = function () {
  return privateFun.call(this, ">>");
}
    
module.exports= MyObject;

Load the file:

var MyObject = require("./MyObject");
    
var myObject = new MyObject("bar");
myObject.publicFun();      // Returns ">>bar"
myObject.privateFun(">>"); // ReferenceError: private is not defined

(new!) Native private methods in future JavaScript versions

TC39 private methods and getter/setters for JavaScript classes proposal is stage 3. That means any time soon, JavaScript will implement private methods natively!

Note that JavaScript private class fields already exists in modern JavaScript versions.

Here is an example of how it is used:

class MyObject {

  // Private field
  #foo;
    
  constructor(foo) {
    this.#foo = foo;
  }

  #privateFun(prefix) {
   return prefix + this.#foo;
  }
    
  publicFun() {
    return this.#privateFun(">>");
  }

}

You may need a JavaScript transpiler/compiler to run this code on old JavaScript engines.

PS: If you wonder why the # prefix, read this.

(deprecated) ES7 with the Bind Operator

Warning: The bind operator TC39 proposition is near dead https://github.com/tc39/proposal-bind-operator/issues/53#issuecomment-374271822

The bind operator :: is an ECMAScript proposal and is implemented in Babel (stage 0).

export default class MyObject {
  constructor (foo) {
    this._foo = foo;
  }

  publicFun () {
    return this::privateFun(">>");
  }
}

function privateFun (prefix) {
  return prefix + this._foo;
}

Answer 3

You can simulate private methods like this:

function Restaurant() {
}

Restaurant.prototype = (function() {
    var private_stuff = function() {
        // Private code here
    };

    return {

        constructor:Restaurant,

        use_restroom:function() {
            private_stuff();
        }

    };
})();

var r = new Restaurant();

// This will work:
r.use_restroom();

// This will cause an error:
r.private_stuff();

More information on this technique here: http://webreflection.blogspot.com/2008/04/natural-javascript-private-methods.html

Answer 4

In these situations when you have a public API, and you would like private and public methods/properties, I always use the Module Pattern. This pattern was made popular within the YUI library, and the details can be found here:

http://yuiblog.com/blog/2007/06/12/module-pattern/

It is really straightforward, and easy for other developers to comprehend. For a simple example:

var MYLIB = function() {  
    var aPrivateProperty = true;
    var aPrivateMethod = function() {
        // some code here...
    };
    return {
        aPublicMethod : function() {
            aPrivateMethod(); // okay
            // some code here...
        },
        aPublicProperty : true
    };  
}();

MYLIB.aPrivateMethod() // not okay
MYLIB.aPublicMethod() // okay

Answer 5

ES12 Private Methods

You can do this now with es12 private methods. You just need to add a # before the method name.

class ClassWithPrivateMethod {
  #privateMethod() {
    return 'hello world';
  }

  getPrivateMessage() {
    return #privateMethod();
  }
}

Answer 6

Here is the class which I created to understand what Douglas Crockford's has suggested in his site Private Members in JavaScript

function Employee(id, name) { //Constructor
    //Public member variables
    this.id = id;
    this.name = name;
    //Private member variables
    var fName;
    var lName;
    var that = this;
    //By convention, we create a private variable 'that'. This is used to     
    //make the object available to the private methods. 

    //Private function
    function setFName(pfname) {
        fName = pfname;
        alert('setFName called');
    }
    //Privileged function
    this.setLName = function (plName, pfname) {
        lName = plName;  //Has access to private variables
        setFName(pfname); //Has access to private function
        alert('setLName called ' + this.id); //Has access to member variables
    }
    //Another privileged member has access to both member variables and private variables
    //Note access of this.dataOfBirth created by public member setDateOfBirth
    this.toString = function () {
        return 'toString called ' + this.id + ' ' + this.name + ' ' + fName + ' ' + lName + ' ' + this.dataOfBirth; 
    }
}
//Public function has access to member variable and can create on too but does not have access to private variable
Employee.prototype.setDateOfBirth = function (dob) {
    alert('setDateOfBirth called ' + this.id);
    this.dataOfBirth = dob;   //Creates new public member note this is accessed by toString
    //alert(fName); //Does not have access to private member
}
$(document).ready()
{
    var employee = new Employee(5, 'Shyam'); //Create a new object and initialize it with constructor
    employee.setLName('Bhaskar', 'Ram');  //Call privileged function
    employee.setDateOfBirth('1/1/2000');  //Call public function
    employee.id = 9;                     //Set up member value
    //employee.setFName('Ram');  //can not call Private Privileged method
    alert(employee.toString());  //See the changed object

}

Answer 7

ES2021 / ES12 - Private Methods

Private method names start with a hash # prefix and can be accessed only inside the class where it is defined.

class Restaurant {

  // private method
  #private_stuff() {
    console.log("private stuff");
  }

  // public method
  buy_food() {
    this.#private_stuff();
  }

};

const restaurant = new Restaurant();
restaurant.buy_food(); // "private stuff";
restaurant.private_stuff(); // Uncaught TypeError: restaurant.private_stuff is not a function

Answer 8

I conjured up this: EDIT: Actually, someone has linked to a identical solution. Duh!

var Car = function() {
}

Car.prototype = (function() {
    var hotWire = function() {
        // Private code *with* access to public properties through 'this'
        alert( this.drive() ); // Alerts 'Vroom!'
    }

    return {
        steal: function() {
            hotWire.call( this ); // Call a private method
        },
        drive: function() {
            return 'Vroom!';
        }
    };
})();

var getAwayVechile = new Car();

hotWire(); // Not allowed
getAwayVechile.hotWire(); // Not allowed
getAwayVechile.steal(); // Alerts 'Vroom!'

Answer 9

I think such questions come up again and again because of the lack of understanding of the closures. Сlosures is most important thing in JS. Every JS programmer have to feel the essence of it.

1. First of all we need to make separate scope (closure).

function () {

}

2. In this area, we can do whatever we want. And no one will know about it.

function () {
    var name,
        secretSkills = {
            pizza: function () { return new Pizza() },
            sushi: function () { return new Sushi() }
        }

    function Restaurant(_name) {
        name = _name
    }
    Restaurant.prototype.getFood = function (name) {
        return name in secretSkills ? secretSkills[name]() : null
    }
}

3. For the world to know about our restaurant class, we have to return it from the closure.

var Restaurant = (function () {
    // Restaurant definition
    return Restaurant
})()

4. At the end, we have:

var Restaurant = (function () {
    var name,
        secretSkills = {
            pizza: function () { return new Pizza() },
            sushi: function () { return new Sushi() }
        }

    function Restaurant(_name) {
        name = _name
    }
    Restaurant.prototype.getFood = function (name) {
        return name in secretSkills ? secretSkills[name]() : null
    }
    return Restaurant
})()

5. Also, this approach has potential for inheritance and templating

// Abstract class
function AbstractRestaurant(skills) {
    var name
    function Restaurant(_name) {
        name = _name
    }
    Restaurant.prototype.getFood = function (name) {
        return skills && name in skills ? skills[name]() : null
    }
    return Restaurant
}

// Concrete classes
SushiRestaurant = AbstractRestaurant({ 
    sushi: function() { return new Sushi() } 
})

PizzaRestaurant = AbstractRestaurant({ 
    pizza: function() { return new Pizza() } 
})

var r1 = new SushiRestaurant('Yo! Sushi'),
    r2 = new PizzaRestaurant('Dominos Pizza')

r1.getFood('sushi')
r2.getFood('pizza')

I hope this helps someone better understand this subject

Answer 10

Personally, I prefer the following pattern for creating classes in JavaScript :

var myClass = (function() {
    // Private class properties go here

    var blueprint = function() {
        // Private instance properties go here
        ...
    };

    blueprint.prototype = { 
        // Public class properties go here
        ...
    };

    return  {
         // Public class properties go here
        create : function() { return new blueprint(); }
        ...
    };
})();

As you can see, it allows you to define both class properties and instance properties, each of which can be public and private.

---

Demo

var Restaurant = function() {
    var totalfoodcount = 0;        // Private class property
    var totalrestroomcount  = 0;   // Private class property
    
    var Restaurant = function(name){
        var foodcount = 0;         // Private instance property
        var restroomcount  = 0;    // Private instance property
        
        this.name = name
        
        this.incrementFoodCount = function() {
            foodcount++;
            totalfoodcount++;
            this.printStatus();
        };
        this.incrementRestroomCount = function() {
            restroomcount++;
            totalrestroomcount++;
            this.printStatus();
        };
        this.getRestroomCount = function() {
            return restroomcount;
        },
        this.getFoodCount = function() {
            return foodcount;
        }
    };
   
    Restaurant.prototype = {
        name : '',
        buy_food : function(){
           this.incrementFoodCount();
        },
        use_restroom : function(){
           this.incrementRestroomCount();
        },
        getTotalRestroomCount : function() {
            return totalrestroomcount;
        },
        getTotalFoodCount : function() {
            return totalfoodcount;
        },
        printStatus : function() {
           document.body.innerHTML
               += '<h3>Buying food at '+this.name+'</h3>'
               + '<ul>' 
               + '<li>Restroom count at ' + this.name + ' : '+ this.getRestroomCount() + '</li>'
               + '<li>Food count at ' + this.name + ' : ' + this.getFoodCount() + '</li>'
               + '<li>Total restroom count : '+ this.getTotalRestroomCount() + '</li>'
               + '<li>Total food count : '+ this.getTotalFoodCount() + '</li>'
               + '</ul>';
        }
    };

    return  { // Singleton public properties
        create : function(name) {
            return new Restaurant(name);
        },
        printStatus : function() {
          document.body.innerHTML
              += '<hr />'
              + '<h3>Overview</h3>'
              + '<ul>' 
              + '<li>Total restroom count : '+ Restaurant.prototype.getTotalRestroomCount() + '</li>'
              + '<li>Total food count : '+ Restaurant.prototype.getTotalFoodCount() + '</li>'
              + '</ul>'
              + '<hr />';
        }
    };
}();

var Wendys = Restaurant.create("Wendy's");
var McDonalds = Restaurant.create("McDonald's");
var KFC = Restaurant.create("KFC");
var BurgerKing = Restaurant.create("Burger King");

Restaurant.printStatus();

Wendys.buy_food();
Wendys.use_restroom();
KFC.use_restroom();
KFC.use_restroom();
Wendys.use_restroom();
McDonalds.buy_food();
BurgerKing.buy_food();

Restaurant.printStatus();

BurgerKing.buy_food();
Wendys.use_restroom();
McDonalds.buy_food();
KFC.buy_food();
Wendys.buy_food();
BurgerKing.buy_food();
McDonalds.buy_food();

Restaurant.printStatus();

See also this Fiddle.

Answer 11

All of this closure will cost you. Make sure you test the speed implications especially in IE. You will find you are better off with a naming convention. There are still a lot of corporate web users out there that are forced to use IE6...

Answer 12

Don't be so verbose. It's Javascript. Use a Naming Convention.

After years of working in es6 classes, I recently started work on an es5 project (using requireJS which is already very verbose-looking). I've been over and over all the strategies mentioned here and it all basically boils down to use a naming convention:

1. Javascript doesn't have scope keywords like private. Other developers entering Javascript will know this upfront. Therefore, a simple naming convention is more than sufficient. A simple naming convention of prefixing with an underscore solves the problem of both private properties and private methods.
2. Let's take advantage of the Prototype for speed reasons, but lets not get anymore verbose than that. Let's try to keep the es5 "class" looking as closely to what we might expect in other backend languages (and treat every file as a class, even if we don't need to return an instance).
3. Let's demonstrate with a more realistic module situation (we'll use old es5 and old requireJs).

my-tooltip.js

    define([
        'tooltip'
    ],
    function(
        tooltip
    ){

        function MyTooltip() {
            // Later, if needed, we can remove the underscore on some
            // of these (make public) and allow clients of our class
            // to set them.
            this._selector = "#my-tooltip"
            this._template = 'Hello from inside my tooltip!';
            this._initTooltip();
        }

        MyTooltip.prototype = {
            constructor: MyTooltip,

            _initTooltip: function () {
                new tooltip.tooltip(this._selector, {
                    content: this._template,
                    closeOnClick: true,
                    closeButton: true
                });
            }
        }

        return {
            init: function init() {
               new MyTooltip();  // <-- Our constructor adds our tooltip to the DOM so not much we need to do after instantiation.
            }

            // You could instead return a new instantiation, 
            // if later you do more with this class.
            /* 
            create: function create() {
               return new MyTooltip();
            }
            */
        }
    });

Answer 13

Take any of the solutions that follow Crockford's private or priviledged pattern. For example:

function Foo(x) {
    var y = 5;
    var bar = function() {
        return y * x;
    };

    this.public = function(z) {
        return bar() + x * z;
    };
}

In any case where the attacker has no "execute" right on the JS context he has no way of accessing any "public" or "private" fields or methods. In case the attacker does have that access he can execute this one-liner:

eval("Foo = " + Foo.toString().replace(
    /{/, "{ this.eval = function(code) { return eval(code); }; "
));

Note that the above code is generic to all constructor-type-privacy. It will fail with some of the solutions here but it should be clear that pretty much all of the closure based solutions can be broken like this with different replace() parameters.

After this is executed any object created with new Foo() is going to have an eval method which can be called to return or change values or methods defined in the constructor's closure, e.g.:

f = new Foo(99);
f.eval("x");
f.eval("y");
f.eval("x = 8");

The only problem I can see with this that it won't work for cases where there is only one instance and it's created on load. But then there is no reason to actually define a prototype and in that case the attacker can simply recreate the object instead of the constructor as long as he has a way of passing the same parameters (e.g. they are constant or calculated from available values).

In my opinion, this pretty much makes Crockford's solution useless. Since the "privacy" is easily broken the downsides of his solution (reduced readability & maintainability, decreased performance, increased memory) makes the "no privacy" prototype based method the better choice.

I do usually use leading underscores to mark __private and _protected methods and fields (Perl style), but the idea of having privacy in JavaScript just shows how it's a misunderstood language.

Therefore I disagree with Crockford except for his first sentence.

So how do you get real privacy in JS? Put everything that is required to be private on the server side and use JS to do AJAX calls.

Answer 14

If you want the full range of public and private functions with the ability for public functions to access private functions, layout code for an object like this:

function MyObject(arg1, arg2, ...) {
  //constructor code using constructor arguments...
  //create/access public variables as 
  // this.var1 = foo;

  //private variables

  var v1;
  var v2;

  //private functions
  function privateOne() {
  }

  function privateTwon() {
  }

  //public functions

  MyObject.prototype.publicOne = function () {
  };

  MyObject.prototype.publicTwo = function () {
  };
}

Answer 15

What about this?

var Restaurant = (function() {

 var _id = 0;
 var privateVars = [];

 function Restaurant(name) {
     this.id = ++_id;
     this.name = name;
     privateVars[this.id] = {
         cooked: []
     };
 }

 Restaurant.prototype.cook = function (food) {
     privateVars[this.id].cooked.push(food);
 }

 return Restaurant;

})();

Private variable lookup is impossible outside of the scope of the immediate function. There is no duplication of functions, saving memory.

The downside is that the lookup of private variables is clunky privateVars[this.id].cooked is ridiculous to type. There is also an extra "id" variable.

Answer 16

Here's what i enjoyed the most so far regarding private/public methods/members and instantiation in javascript:

here is the article: http://www.sefol.com/?p=1090

and here is the example:

var Person = (function () {

    //Immediately returns an anonymous function which builds our modules 
    return function (name, location) {

        alert("createPerson called with " + name);

        var localPrivateVar = name;

        var localPublicVar = "A public variable";

        var localPublicFunction = function () {
            alert("PUBLIC Func called, private var is :" + localPrivateVar)
        };

        var localPrivateFunction = function () {
            alert("PRIVATE Func called ")
        };

        var setName = function (name) {

            localPrivateVar = name;

        }

        return {

            publicVar: localPublicVar,

            location: location,

            publicFunction: localPublicFunction,

            setName: setName

        }

    }
})();


//Request a Person instance - should print "createPerson called with ben"
var x = Person("ben", "germany");

//Request a Person instance - should print "createPerson called with candide"
var y = Person("candide", "belgium");

//Prints "ben"
x.publicFunction();

//Prints "candide"
y.publicFunction();

//Now call a public function which sets the value of a private variable in the x instance
x.setName("Ben 2");

//Shouldn't have changed this : prints "candide"
y.publicFunction();

//Should have changed this : prints "Ben 2"
x.publicFunction();

JSFiddle: http://jsfiddle.net/northkildonan/kopj3dt3/1/

Answer 17

The module pattern is right in most cases. But if you have thousands of instances, classes save memory. If saving memory is a concern and your objects contain a small amount of private data, but have a lot of public functions, then you'll want all public functions to live in the .prototype to save memory.

This is what I came up with:

var MyClass = (function () {
    var secret = {}; // You can only getPriv() if you know this
    function MyClass() {
        var that = this, priv = {
            foo: 0 // ... and other private values
        };
        that.getPriv = function (proof) {
            return (proof === secret) && priv;
        };
    }
    MyClass.prototype.inc = function () {
        var priv = this.getPriv(secret);
        priv.foo += 1;
        return priv.foo;
    };
    return MyClass;
}());
var x = new MyClass();
x.inc(); // 1
x.inc(); // 2

The object priv contains private properties. It is accessible through the public function getPriv(), but this function returns false unless you pass it the secret, and this is only known inside the main closure.

Answer 18

Wrap all code in Anonymous Function: Then , all functions will be private ,ONLY functions attached to window object :

(function(w,nameSpacePrivate){
     w.Person=function(name){
         this.name=name;   
         return this;
     };

     w.Person.prototype.profilePublic=function(){
          return nameSpacePrivate.profile.call(this);
     };  

     nameSpacePrivate.profile=function(){
       return 'My name is '+this.name;
     };

})(window,{});

Use this :

  var abdennour=new Person('Abdennour');
  abdennour.profilePublic();

FIDDLE

Answer 19

The apotheosis of the Module Pattern: The Revealing Module Pattern

A neat little extension to a very robust pattern.

Answer 20

var TestClass = function( ) {

    var privateProperty = 42;

    function privateMethod( ) {
        alert( "privateMethod, " + privateProperty );
    }

    this.public = {
        constructor: TestClass,

        publicProperty: 88,
        publicMethod: function( ) {
            alert( "publicMethod" );
            privateMethod( );
        }
    };
};
TestClass.prototype = new TestClass( ).public;


var myTestClass = new TestClass( );

alert( myTestClass.publicProperty );
myTestClass.publicMethod( );

alert( myTestClass.privateMethod || "no privateMethod" );

Similar to georgebrock but a little less verbose (IMHO) Any problems with doing it this way? (I haven't seen it anywhere)

edit: I realised this is kinda useless since every independent instantiation has its own copy of the public methods, thus undermining the use of the prototype.

Answer 21

I prefer to store private data in an associated WeakMap. This allows you to keep your public methods on the prototype where they belong. This seems to be the most efficient way to handle this problem for large numbers of objects.

const data = new WeakMap();

function Foo(value) {
    data.set(this, {value});
}

// public method accessing private value
Foo.prototype.accessValue = function() {
    return data.get(this).value;
}

// private 'method' accessing private value
function accessValue(foo) {
    return data.get(foo).value;
}

export {Foo};

Answer 22

2021 HERE!

This polyfill effectively hides your private properties and methods returning undefined when you try to read your private property and a TypeError when you try to execute your private method thus effectively making them both PRIVATE to the outside but giving you access to them by using your public methods.

If you check it you will see it is very easy to implement. For the most part you don't need to do anything quirky like using Proxy objects, underscore functions (_myprivate), getters or setters. None of that. The only thing required is to place in your constructor that like snippet of code that is aimed to let you expose your public interface to the outside world.

((self) => ({
      pubProp: self.pubProp,
      // More public properties to export HERE
      // ...
      pubMethod: self.pubMethod.bind(self)
      // More public mehods to export HERE
      // Be sure bind each of them to self!!!
      // ... 
 }))(self);

The above code is where the magic happens. It is an IIFE that returns an object with just the properties and methods you want to exposed and bound to the context of the object that was first instantiated.

You can still access your hidden properties and methods but only through your public methods just the way OOP should do.
Consider that part of the code as your module.exports

BTW, this is without using the latest ECMAScript 2022 # addition to the language.

'use strict';

class MyClass {
  constructor(pubProp) {
    let self = this;
    self.pubProp = pubProp;
    self.privProp = "I'm a private property!";
    return ((self) => ({
      pubProp: self.pubProp,
      // More public properties to export HERE
      // ...
      pubMethod: self.pubMethod.bind(self)
      // More public mehods to export HERE
      // Be sure to bind each of them to self!!!
      // ... 
    }))(self);
  }

  pubMethod() {
    console.log("I'm a public method!");
    console.log(this.pubProp);

    return this.privMethod();
  }

  privMethod() {
    console.log("I'm a private method!");
  return this.privProp
  }
}

const myObj = new MyClass("I'm a public property!");
console.log("***DUMPING MY NEW INSTANCE***");
console.dir(myObj);
console.log("");
console.log("***TESTING ACCESS TO PUBLIC PROPERTIES***");
console.log(myObj.pubProp);
console.log("");
console.log("***TESTING ACCESS TO PRIVATE PROPERTIES***");
console.log(myObj.privProp);
console.log("");
console.log("***TESTING ACCESS TO PUBLIC METHODS***");
console.log("1. pubMethod access pubProp ");
console.log("2. pubMethod calls privMethod");
console.log("3. privMethod access privProp");
console.log("")
console.log(myObj.pubMethod());
console.log("");
console.log("***TESTING ACCESS TO PRIVATE METHODS***");
console.log(myObj.privMethod());

Check my gist

Answer 23

Since everybody was posting here his own code, I'm gonna do that too...

I like Crockford because he introduced real object oriented patterns in Javascript. But he also came up with a new misunderstanding, the "that" one.

So why is he using "that = this"? It has nothing to do with private functions at all. It has to do with inner functions!

Because according to Crockford this is buggy code:

Function Foo( ) {
    this.bar = 0; 
    var foobar=function( ) {
        alert(this.bar);
    }
} 

So he suggested doing this:

Function Foo( ) {
    this.bar = 0;
    that = this; 
    var foobar=function( ) {
        alert(that.bar);
    }
}

So as I said, I'm quite sure that Crockford was wrong his explanation about that and this (but his code is certainly correct). Or was he just fooling the Javascript world, to know who is copying his code? I dunno...I'm no browser geek ;D

EDIT

Ah, that's what is all about: What does 'var that = this;' mean in JavaScript?

So Crockie was really wrong with his explanation....but right with his code, so he's still a great guy. :))

Answer 24

In general I added the private Object _ temporarily to the object. You have to open the privacy exlipcitly in the "Power-constructor" for the method. If you call the method from the prototype, you will be able to overwrite the prototype-method

• Make a public method accessible in the "Power-constructor": (ctx is the object context)

  ctx.test = GD.Fabric.open('test', GD.Test.prototype, ctx, _); // is a private object
  

• Now I have this openPrivacy:

  GD.Fabric.openPrivacy = function(func, clss, ctx, _) {
      return function() {
          ctx._ = _;
          var res = clss[func].apply(ctx, arguments);
          ctx._ = null;
          return res;
      };
  };
  

Answer 25

You have to put a closure around your actual constructor-function, where you can define your private methods. To change data of the instances through these private methods, you have to give them "this" with them, either as an function argument or by calling this function with .apply(this) :

var Restaurant = (function(){
    var private_buy_food = function(that){
        that.data.soldFood = true;
    }
    var private_take_a_shit = function(){
        this.data.isdirty = true;   
    }
    // New Closure
    function restaurant()
    {
        this.data = {
            isdirty : false,
            soldFood: false,
        };
    }

    restaurant.prototype.buy_food = function()
    {
       private_buy_food(this);
    }
    restaurant.prototype.use_restroom = function()
    {
       private_take_a_shit.call(this);
    }
    return restaurant;
})()

// TEST:

var McDonalds = new Restaurant();
McDonalds.buy_food();
McDonalds.use_restroom();
console.log(McDonalds);
console.log(McDonalds.__proto__);

Answer 26

This is what I worked out:

Needs one class of sugar code that you can find here. Also supports protected, inheritance, virtual, static stuff...

;( function class_Restaurant( namespace )
{
    'use strict';

    if( namespace[ "Restaurant" ] ) return    // protect against double inclusions

        namespace.Restaurant = Restaurant
    var Static               = TidBits.OoJs.setupClass( namespace, "Restaurant" )


    // constructor
    //
    function Restaurant()
    {
        this.toilets = 3

        this.Private( private_stuff )

        return this.Public( buy_food, use_restroom )
    }

    function private_stuff(){ console.log( "There are", this.toilets, "toilets available") }

    function buy_food     (){ return "food"        }
    function use_restroom (){ this.private_stuff() }

})( window )


var chinese = new Restaurant

console.log( chinese.buy_food()      );  // output: food
console.log( chinese.use_restroom()  );  // output: There are 3 toilets available
console.log( chinese.toilets         );  // output: undefined
console.log( chinese.private_stuff() );  // output: undefined

// and throws: TypeError: Object #<Restaurant> has no method 'private_stuff'

Answer 27

Class({  
    Namespace:ABC,  
    Name:"ClassL2",  
    Bases:[ABC.ClassTop],  
    Private:{  
        m_var:2  
    },  
    Protected:{  
        proval:2,  
        fight:Property(function(){  
            this.m_var--;  
            console.log("ClassL2::fight (m_var)" +this.m_var);  
        },[Property.Type.Virtual])  
    },  
    Public:{  
        Fight:function(){  
            console.log("ClassL2::Fight (m_var)"+this.m_var);  
            this.fight();  
        }  
    }  
});  

https://github.com/nooning/JSClass

Answer 28

I have created a new tool to allow you to have true private methods on the prototype https://github.com/TremayneChrist/ProtectJS

Example:

var MyObject = (function () {

  // Create the object
  function MyObject() {}

  // Add methods to the prototype
  MyObject.prototype = {

    // This is our public method
    public: function () {
      console.log('PUBLIC method has been called');
    },

    // This is our private method, using (_)
    _private: function () {
      console.log('PRIVATE method has been called');
    }
  }

  return protect(MyObject);

})();

// Create an instance of the object
var mo = new MyObject();

// Call its methods
mo.public(); // Pass
mo._private(); // Fail

Answer 29

I know it's a bit too late but how about this?

var obj = function(){
    var pr = "private";
    var prt = Object.getPrototypeOf(this);
    if(!prt.hasOwnProperty("showPrivate")){
        prt.showPrivate = function(){
            console.log(pr);
        }
    }    
}

var i = new obj();
i.showPrivate();
console.log(i.hasOwnProperty("pr"));

Answer 30

There are many answers on this question already, but nothing fitted my needs. So i came up with my own solution, I hope it is usefull for someone:

function calledPrivate(){
    var stack = new Error().stack.toString().split("\n");
    function getClass(line){
        var i = line.indexOf(" ");
        var i2 = line.indexOf(".");
        return line.substring(i,i2);
    }
    return getClass(stack[2])==getClass(stack[3]);
}

class Obj{
    privateMethode(){
        if(calledPrivate()){
            console.log("your code goes here");
        }
    }
    publicMethode(){
        this.privateMethode();
    }
}

var obj = new Obj();
obj.publicMethode(); //logs "your code goes here"
obj.privateMethode(); //does nothing

As you can see this system works when using this type of classes in javascript. As far as I figured out none of the methods commented above did.

Answer 31

Private functions cannot access the public variables using module pattern

Answer 32

An ugly solution but it works:

function Class(cb) {
    const self = {};

    const constructor = (fn) => {
        func = fn;    
    };

    const addPrivate = (fnName, obj) => {
        self[fnName] = obj;
    }

    const addPublic = (fnName, obj) => {
        this[fnName] = obj;
        self[fnName] = obj;
        func.prototype[fnName] = obj;
    }
    
    cb(constructor, addPrivate, addPublic, self);
    return func;
}

const test = new Class((constructor, private, public, self) => {
    constructor(function (test) {
        console.log(test)
    });
    public('test', 'yay');
    private('qwe', 'nay');
    private('no', () => {
        return 'hello'
    })
    public('asd', () => {
        return 'this is public'
    })
    public('hello', () => {
        return self.qwe + self.no() + self.asd()
    })
})
const asd = new test('qweqwe');
console.log(asd.hello());

Answer 33

Old question but this is a rather simple task that can be solved properly with core JS... without the Class abstraction of ES6. In fact as far as i can tell, the Class abstraction do not even solve this problem.

We can do this job both with the good old constructor function or even better with Object.create(). Lets go with the constructor first. This will essentially be a similar solution to georgebrock's answer which is criticised because all restaurants created by the Restaurant constructor will have the same private methods. I will try to overcome that limitation.

function restaurantFactory(name,menu){

  function Restaurant(name){
    this.name = name;
  }

  function prototypeFactory(menu){
    // This is a private function
    function calculateBill(item){
      return menu[item] || 0;
    }
    // This is the prototype to be
    return { constructor: Restaurant
           , askBill    : function(...items){
                            var cost = items.reduce((total,item) => total + calculateBill(item) ,0)
                            return "Thank you for dining at " + this.name + ". Total is: " + cost + "\n"
                          }
           , callWaiter : function(){
                            return "I have just called the waiter at " + this.name + "\n";
                          }
           }
  }

  Restaurant.prototype = prototypeFactory(menu);

  return new Restaurant(name,menu);
}

var menu = { water: 1
           , coke : 2
           , beer : 3
           , beef : 15
           , rice : 2
           },
    name = "Silver Scooop",
    rest = restaurantFactory(name,menu);

console.log(rest.callWaiter());
console.log(rest.askBill("beer", "beef"));

Now obviously we can not access menu from outside but we may easily rename the name property of a restaurant.

This can also be done with Object.create() in which case we skip the constructor function and simply do like var rest = Object.create(prototypeFactory(menu)) and add the name property to the rest object afterwards like rest.name = name.

Answer 34

I know it is an old topic but i tried to find a way to preserve the code 'simplicity' for maintainability purposes and keep a light memory load. It came with this pattern. Hope it helps.

const PublicClass=function(priv,pub,ro){
    let _priv=new PrivateClass(priv,pub,ro);
    ['publicMethod'].forEach(k=>this[k]=(...args)=>_priv[k](...args));
    ['publicVar'].forEach(k=>Object.defineProperty(this,k,{get:()=>_priv[k],set:v=>_priv[k]=v}));
    ['readOnlyVar'].forEach(k=>Object.defineProperty(this,k,{get:()=>_priv[k]}));
};

class PrivateClass{
    constructor(priv,pub,ro){
        this.privateVar=priv;
        this.publicVar=pub;
        this.readOnlyVar=ro;
    }
    publicMethod(arg1,arg2){
        return this.privateMethod(arg1,arg2);
    }
    privateMethod(arg1,arg2){
        return arg1+''+arg2;
    }
}
// in node;
module.exports=PublicClass;
// in browser;
const PublicClass=(function(){
    // code here
    return PublicClass;
})();

Same principle for old browsers :

var PublicClass=function(priv,pub,ro){
    var scope=this;
    var _priv=new PrivateClass(priv,pub,ro);
    ['publicMethod'].forEach(function(k){
        scope[k]=function(){return _priv[k].apply(_priv,arguments)};
    });
    ['publicVar'].forEach(function(k){
        Object.defineProperty(scope,k,{get:function(){return _priv[k]},set:function(v){_priv[k]=v}});
    });
    ['readOnlyVar'].forEach(function(k){
        Object.defineProperty(scope,k,{get:function(){return _priv[k]}});
    });
};

var PrivateClass=function(priv,pub,ro){
    this.privateVar=priv;
    this.publicVar=pub;
    this.readOnlyVar=ro;
};
PrivateClass.prototype.publicMethod=function(arg1,arg2){
    return this.privateMethod(arg1,arg2);
};
PrivateClass.prototype.privateMethod=function(arg1,arg2){
    return arg1+''+arg2;
};

---

To lighten public class verbosity and load, apply this pattern to a constructor :

const AbstractPublicClass=function(instanciate,inherit){
    let _priv=instanciate();
    inherit.methods?.forEach(k=>this[k]=(...args)=>_priv[k](...args));
    inherit.vars?.forEach(k=>Object.defineProperty(this,k,{get:()=>_priv[k],set:v=>_priv[k]=v}));
    inherit.readonly?.forEach(k=>Object.defineProperty(this,k,{get:()=>_priv[k]}));
};

AbstractPublicClass.static=function(_pub,_priv,inherit){
    inherit.methods?.forEach(k=>_pub[k]=(...args)=>_priv[k](...args));
    inherit.vars?.forEach(k=>Object.defineProperty(_pub,k,{get:()=>_priv[k],set:v=>_priv[k]=v}));
    inherit.readonly?.forEach(k=>Object.defineProperty(_pub,k,{get:()=>_priv[k]}));
};

Use :

// PrivateClass ...
PrivateClass.staticVar='zog';
PrivateClass.staticMethod=function(){return 'hello '+this.staticVar;};


const PublicClass=function(priv,pub,ro){
    AbstractPublicClass.apply(this,[()=>new PrivateClass(priv,pub,ro),{
        methods:['publicMethod'],
        vars:['publicVar'],
        readonly:['readOnlyVar']
    }]);
};
AbstractPublicClass.static(PublicClass,PrivateClass,{
    methods:['staticMethod'],
    vars:['staticVar']
});

---

PS : The default (negligeable most of the time) in this approach is it can take a tiny computing load compared to a full public. But as long as you dont use it whith highly solicited classes that should be ok.