Skip to content

Instantly share code, notes, and snippets.

@HenrikJoreteg
Created October 22, 2010 21:20
Show Gist options
  • Save HenrikJoreteg/641397 to your computer and use it in GitHub Desktop.
Save HenrikJoreteg/641397 to your computer and use it in GitHub Desktop.
Rather than creating some other util global, just extend underscore.js with any additional methods you want.
// If you don't use underscore.js, use it (http://documentcloud.github.com/underscore/)
// Then, use underscore's mixin method to extend it with all your other utility methods
// like so:
_.mixin({
escapeHtml: function () {
return this.replace(/&/g,'&')
.replace(/>/g,'>')
.replace(/</g,'&lt;')
.replace(/"/g,'&quot;')
.replace(/'/g,'&#39;');
},
otherFunc: function () {
// etc, etc.
}
});
// simple. but. handy.
@millermedeiros
Copy link

It is very easy to create chaining in JavaScript, be it for an existing object or creating it from scratch (gist), that is not a valid reason for polluting a namespace you don't own, if you want a detailed explanation read this blog post.

I really believe that extending underscore/jQuery/etc is the wrong approach in most cases, if you don't agree read Zackas post again..

You don't need to follow the Java namespacing approach to avoid collisions, if you use a module loader like RequireJS you don't even need to create global variables in most cases (not even for your helper modules) and your code can be organized on a sane structure.

PS: each Object/Class/Function should have a single responsibility and this approach defeats this principle.

@stephenhandley
Copy link

__.myFunction()

@findzen
Copy link

findzen commented May 1, 2012

+1 for __.myFunction()

@millermedeiros
Copy link

BTW, I created a library with many utility functions (similar to the ones present on underscore) but instead of adding every single method inside the same "namespace" we have individual modules for each method - so you can load only what you need or a full package at once - and since it's written in the AMD format it doesn't pollute the global namespace. IMHO that is a better approach and also way more scalable since we can add more methods to the lib without worrying about file size... The era of a single global namespace is definitely over to me, AMD is the future.

@krunkosaurus
Copy link

This is an old post, but just an fyi that backbone uses underscore and has an escape feature. I checked the backbone source and it uses the escape function from underscore:

_.escape = function(string) {
return (''+string).replace(/&/g, '&').replace(/</g, '<').replace(/>/g, '>').replace(/"/g, '"').replace(/'/g, ''').replace(///g,'/');
};

So this mixin is no longer needed.

Also what's this nonsense from @millermedeiros on not extending objects you don't own? I understand why its horrible to extend the native DOM, but libraries like underscore and jQuery were made to be extended. In your uncompressed javascript source files you actually place the additional plugins or "mixins" under to signify that they are additions. Even as a new developer on a project, it makes complete sense.

@jdalton
Copy link

jdalton commented Sep 15, 2012

Yap, @krunkasaurus (lol, I love the name) is right, Underscore already has _.escape and the edge version has _.unescape too.

You can also use Lo-Dash, a drop-in replacement for Underscore delivering performance, bug fixes, and additional features to make a custom build and embed it directly in your project like (BonsaiJS)[http://bonsaijs.org/].

@kjantzer
Copy link

perfect! just what I was looking for. Thanks!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment