I want to understand why in the below example, the "call" method was used.
loadScript
is a function that appends a script tag to a document, and has an optional callback function.
promisify
returns a wrapper function that in turn returns a promise, effectively converting `loadScript' from a callback-based function to a promise based function.
function promisify(f) {
return function (...args) { // return a wrapper-function
return new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
function callback(err, result) { // our custom callback for f
if (err) {
reject(err);
} else {
resolve(result);
}
}
args.push(callback); // append our custom callback to the end of f arguments
f.call(this, ...args); // call the original function
});
};
}
// usage:
let loadScriptPromise = promisify(loadScript);
loadScriptPromise(...).then(...);
loadScript()
:
function loadScript(src, callback) {
let script = document.createElement("script");
script.src = src;
script.onload = () => callback(null, script);
script.onerror = () => callback(new Error(`Script load error for ${src}`));
document.head.append(script);
}
I understand that call
is used to force a certain context during function call, but why not use just use f(...args)
instead of f.call(this, ...args)
?