What does it mean global namespace would be polluted?

后端 未结 3 1931
萌比男神i
萌比男神i 2020-11-22 05:52

What does it mean global namespace would be polluted?

I don\'t really understand what global namespace getting polluted means.

3条回答
  •  一向
    一向 (楼主)
    2020-11-22 06:26

    Quick Note On Garbage Collection

    As variables lose scope, they will be eligible for garbage collection. If they are scoped globally, then they will not be eligible for collection until the global namespace loses scope.

    Here is an example:

    var arra = [];
    for (var i = 0; i < 2003000; i++) {
     arra.push(i * i + i);
    }
    

    Adding this to your global namespace (at least for me) should ad 10,000 kb of memory usage (win7 firefox) which will not be collected. Other browsers may handle this differently.

    Whereas having that same code in a scope which goes out of scope like this:

    (function(){
     var arra = [];
     for (var i = 0; i < 2003000; i++) {
      arra.push(i * i + i);
     }
    })();
    

    Will allow arra to lose scope after the closure executes and be eligible for garbage collection.

    Global Namespace Is Your Friend

    Despite the many claims against using the global namespace, it is your friend. And like a good friend, you should not abuse your relationship.

    Be Gentle

    Don't abuse (usually referred to as "polluting") the global namespace. And what I mean by do not abuse the global namespace is - do not create multiple global variables. Here is a bad example of using the global namespace.

    var x1 = 5;
    var x2 = 20;
    var y1 = 3
    var y2 = 16;
    
    var rise = y2 - y1;
    var run = x2 - x1;
    
    var slope = rise / run;
    
    var risesquared = rise * rise;
    var runsquared = run * run;
    
    var distancesquared = risesquared + runsquared;
    
    var distance = Math.sqrt(dinstancesquared);
    

    This is going to create 11 global variables which could possibly be overwritten or misconstrued somewhere.

    Be Resourceful

    A more resourceful approach, which does not pollute the global namespace, would be to wrap this all in the module pattern and only use one global variable while exposing multiple variables.

    Here is an example: (Please note this is simple and there is no error handling)

    //Calculate is the only exposed global variable
    var Calculate = function () {
     //all defintions in this closure are local, and will not be exposed to the global namespace
     var Coordinates = [];//array for coordinates
     var Coordinate = function (xcoord, ycoord) {//definition for type Coordinate
       this.x = xcoord;//assign values similar to a constructor
       this.y = ycoord;
      };
    
      return {//these methods will be exposed through the Calculate object
       AddCoordinate: function (x, y) {
       Coordinates.push(new Coordinate(x, y));//Add a new coordinate
      },
    
      Slope: function () {//Calculates slope and returns the value
       var c1 = Coordinates[0];
       var c2 = Coordinates[1];
       return c2.y - c1.y / c2.x - c1.x;//calculates rise over run and returns result
      },
    
      Distance: function () {
       //even with an excessive amount of variables declared, these are all still local
       var c1 = Coordinates[0];
       var c2 = Coordinates[1];
    
       var rise = c2.y - c1.y;
       var run = c2.x - c1.x;
    
       var risesquared = rise * rise;
       var runsquared = run * run;
    
       var distancesquared = risesquared + runsquared;
    
       var distance = Math.sqrt(distancesquared);
    
       return distance;
      }
     };
    };
    
    //this is a "self executing closure" and is used because these variables will be
    //scoped to the function, and will not be available globally nor will they collide
    //with any variable names in the global namespace
    (function () {
     var calc = Calculate();
     calc.AddCoordinate(5, 20);
     calc.AddCoordinate(3, 16);
     console.log(calc.Slope());
     console.log(calc.Distance());
    })();
    

提交回复
热议问题