Its worth mentioning that you are using factory pattern for object creation here. There are also constructor, prototype and dynamic prototype patterns.
Such video should be watched after knowing concepts of the IIFE and the scopes, execution content, variable environment, and things like that after practicing those things so that it makes clear sense to grasp the concept described in this video.
7:22 If you want to make the code even more wierd, you can return the person object directly, by changing row: 8 to this: *_return_*_ person = Object.create(personPrototype, {_ And remove the _return person;_ statement on row:15
I like to create modules with all static functions, with one of them being a special "constructor" function for creating instance objects that the module works with. Then I just pass those instance objects as an argument to any static function that needs to work with instance data. So there's just one static version of all functions and simple data-only objects, without having to mess with ugly Object.prototype.whatever code.
So, the only way to access johnDoe's greet() method is via another person object "janeSmith". That seems weird. I want to call greet() method as johnDoe.greet() and it should printout "john". That is more natural.
Shouldn't the call operator "()" be within the embracing parenthesis? I feel that it would build a tighter bound between the anonymous function and its invocation in a single, ephemeral expression...
what basically he did is he converted the greet method into a singleton, so whenever any person object is create they will all share the same greet method
Before the factory would create its own function and stored it in memory. So everytime you created a new person a new function was also created. The thing is we want to just reuse one of those functions for all of the person's we create. So this made it so only one is created and when he tests it with === he could see that both person's created were using the same function instead of their own unique version of the function.
Its worth mentioning that you are using factory pattern for object creation here. There are also constructor, prototype and dynamic prototype patterns.
when you think your finding your feet in programming and find a video like this. well explained and kinda understood, but forgotten all ready :p
Such video should be watched after knowing concepts of the IIFE and the scopes, execution content, variable environment, and things like that after practicing those things so that it makes clear sense to grasp the concept described in this video.
7:22 If you want to make the code even more wierd, you can return the person object directly, by changing row: 8 to this:
*_return_*_ person = Object.create(personPrototype, {_
And remove the _return person;_ statement on row:15
You should go over setting prototypes directly on objects, and that vs how you did it here.
Why not to use class PersonFactory () { ... } which is way more elegant than IIFE?
Thanks this is what I have been looking for
Good video, i just learned something new
I thought classes are built to take care of this issue?
Very very good. Very straight forward, thanks!
Thanks mate.
Nice video sharing
Thank you mam
I like to create modules with all static functions, with one of them being a special "constructor" function for creating instance objects that the module works with. Then I just pass those instance objects as an argument to any static function that needs to work with instance data. So there's just one static version of all functions and simple data-only objects, without having to mess with ugly Object.prototype.whatever code.
Singleton pattern
@@jboxy seems like a good idea. I've never used a singleton pattern, but I'll just assume it'll work out.
@@omg_look_behind_you it's almost exactly what you're doing or very close to doing :P
So, the only way to access johnDoe's greet() method is via another person object "janeSmith". That seems weird. I want to call greet() method as johnDoe.greet() and it should printout "john". That is more natural.
just use Classes instead. That's why they have been introduced in ES6.
Instead of person argument he should have been used this keyword.
Shouldn't the call operator "()" be within the embracing parenthesis? I feel that it would build a tighter bound between the anonymous function and its invocation in a single, ephemeral expression...
Sweet. Love programming
what basically he did is he converted the greet method into a singleton, so whenever any person object is create they will all share the same greet method
Excellent
Brilliant
I'm confused... Why is it True again ?
Before the factory would create its own function and stored it in memory. So everytime you created a new person a new function was also created. The thing is we want to just reuse one of those functions for all of the person's we create. So this made it so only one is created and when he tests it with === he could see that both person's created were using the same function instead of their own unique version of the function.
What is the name of the extension to live preview on dev tool?
That's developer tools, try Node REPL it's easy
Wow... Is this 2010?
Lol *burn*
@Internet Entity use TypeScript.
Oh my head hurts. lol
just use Classes instead. That's why they have been introduced in ES6.
Couldn't understand, he's complicating it
my brain hurts
happens
just use Classes instead. That's why they have been introduced in ES6.
看起来不太刺激
Um... ES6 anybody? Classes? Hello? What is this bullshit?!