函数与对象文字注释 - 是否存在差异？ [英] Function vs. Object Literal Notaion - is there a diifference?

问题描述

这两种方式都使用相同的呼叫机制。

Both these ways work using the same call mechanism.

显然，我想用最好的方式，但也许这只是一个偏好的问题？

Obviously, I want to use the best way, but perhaps it is just a matter of preference?

样式方面我喜欢Object Literal Notation，因为它提供了外壳。

Style-wise I like the Object Literal Notation because it provides enclosure.

函数符号：

var TextProcessor = function()
{
};
TextProcessor.unEscape = function( second_split )
{
    var element;
    for( element in second_split )
    {
        second_split[element] = second_split[element].replace( '**', '*', 'g' );
        second_split[element] = second_split[element].replace( '|*', '|', 'g' );
    }
    return second_split;
};
TextProcessor.pullBullet = function( text )
{
    var pattern = /<(.+)_([a-z]){1}>$/;
    return pattern.exec( text );
};
TextProcessor.pullDomain = function( text )
{
    return text.match( /:\/\/(www\.)?(.[^\/:]+)/ )[2];
};

对象文字符号

/**
 *TextProcessor
 */

var TextProcessor = 
{
    unEscape:    function( text )
    {
        var index;
        for( index in second_split )
        {
            text[index] = text[index].replace( '**', '*', 'g' );
            text[index] = text[index].replace( '|*', '|', 'g' );
        }
        return second_split;
    },
    pullBullet:  function( text )
    {
        var pattern = /<(.+)_([a-z]){1}>$/;
        return pattern.exec( text );
    },
    pullDomain:  function( text )
    {
        return text.match( /:\/\/(www\.)?(.[^\/:]+)/ )[2];
    }
}

推荐答案

你我做了两件不同的事情。

You're doing two somewhat different things.

• 第一个例子创建一个函数对象并为其分配属性。

• The first example creates a function object and assigns properties to it.

第二个示例创建一个包含这些属性的普通对象。

The second example creates a plain object with those properties.

第一个在你的例子中确实没有多少实际意义。您可以使用函数对象来分配属性，但为什么会这样？这些属性对函数的调用没有影响。

The first one really doesn't make much practical sense in your example. You can use a function object to assign properties, but why would you? Those properties have no impact on the invocation of the function.

Style -wise我喜欢Object Literal Notation，因为它提供了外壳。

我不知道 封闭是。它听起来像是封装和闭包的组合，其中一个对象文字也没有提供。

I don't know what "enclosure" is. It sounds like a combination of encapsulation and closure, of which an object literal provides neither.

回到第一部分，想象一下，如果你创建了这些对象中的任何一个......

Getting back to the first part, imagine if you created any one of these objects...

var TextProcessor = new Number();
var TextProcessor = new Boolean();
var TextProcessor = new Date();

...然后将属性分配给它。它会起作用，但这样做会很奇怪。对象是 Number ， Boolean 或 Date 与手头的任务没有多大关系。

...and then assigned the properties to it. It would work, but it would be an odd thing to do. The fact that the object is a Number, Boolean, or Date has little relevance to the task at hand.

当您将属性分配给函数 object。

That's effectively what you're doing when you assign the properties to a Function object.

这篇关于函数与对象文字注释 - 是否存在差异？的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！