Would the following make the objects fulfil all characteristics that enums have in JavaScript? Something like:
my.namespace.ColorEnum = {
RED : 0,
GREEN : 1,
BLUE : 2
}
// later on
if(currentColor == my.namespace.ColorEnum.RED) {
// whatever
}
Or is there some other way I can do this?
This isn't much of an answer, but I'd say that works just fine, personally
Having said that, since it doesn't matter what the values are (you've used 0, 1, 2), I'd use a meaningful string in case you ever wanted to output the current value.
I don't think my answer below is the best way to write enums in JavaScript anymore. See my blog post for more details: Enums in JavaScript.
Alerting the name is already possible:
if (currentColor == my.namespace.ColorEnum.RED) {
// alert name of currentColor (RED: 0)
var col = my.namespace.ColorEnum;
for (var name in col) {
if (col[name] == col.RED)
alert(name);
}
}
Alternatively, you could make the values objects, so you can have the cake and eat it too:
var SIZE = {
SMALL : {value: 0, name: "Small", code: "S"},
MEDIUM: {value: 1, name: "Medium", code: "M"},
LARGE : {value: 2, name: "Large", code: "L"}
};
var currentSize = SIZE.MEDIUM;
if (currentSize == SIZE.MEDIUM) {
// this alerts: "1: Medium"
alert(currentSize.value + ": " + currentSize.name);
}
In JavaScript, as it is a dynamic language, it is even possible to add enum values to the set later:
// Add EXTRALARGE size
SIZE.EXTRALARGE = {value: 3, name: "Extra Large", code: "XL"};
Remember, the fields of the enum (value, name and code in this example) are not needed for the identity check and are only there for convenience. Also the name of the size property itself does not need to be hard coded, but can also be set dynamically. So supposing you only know the name for your new enum value, you can still add it without problems:
// Add 'Extra Large' size, only knowing it's name
var name = "Extra Large";
SIZE[name] = {value: -1, name: name, code: "?"};
Of course this means that some assumptions can no longer be made (that value represents the correct order for the size for example).
Remember, in JavaScript an object is just like a map or hash table. A set of name-value pairs. You can loop through them or otherwise manipulate them without knowing much about them in advance.
for (var sz in SIZE) {
// sz will be the names of the objects in SIZE, so
// 'SMALL', 'MEDIUM', 'LARGE', 'EXTRALARGE'
var size = SIZE[sz]; // Get the object mapped to the name in sz
for (var prop in size) {
// Get all the properties of the size object, iterates over
// 'value', 'name' and 'code'. You can inspect everything this way.
}
}
And by the way, if you are interested in namespaces, you may want to have a look at my solution for simple but powerful namespace and dependency management for JavaScript: Packages JS
Let's cut straight to the problem: file size. Every other answer listed here bloats your minified code to the extreme. I present to you that for the best possible reduction in code size by minification, performance, readability of code, large scale project management, and syntax hinting in many code editors, this is the correct way to do enumerations: underscore-notation variables.
As demonstrated in the chart above and example below, here are five easy steps to get started:
ENUM_. If independent or side-by-side, use INDEX_.ENUM_ or INDEX_, then the name of the group, then an underscore, then a unique friendly name for the propertyENUMLENGTH_, ENUMLEN_, INDEXLENGTH_, or INDEXLEN_ (whether LEN_ or LENGTH_ is personal preference) enumerated variable at the very end. You should use this variable wherever possible in your code to ensure that adding an extra entry to the enumeration and incrementing this value won't break your code.0 should not be used as an enumerated value because 0 == null, 0 == false, 0 == "", and other JS craziness. I submit to you that, to avoid this problem and boost performance at the same time, always use === and never let == appear in your code except with typeof (e.x. typeof X == "string"). In all my years of using ===, I have never once had a problem with using 0 as an enumeration value. If you are still squeamish, then 1 could be used as the starting value in ENUM_ enumerations (but not in INDEX_ enumerations) without performance penalty in many cases.const ENUM_COLORENUM_RED = 0;
const ENUM_COLORENUM_GREEN = 1;
const ENUM_COLORENUM_BLUE = 2;
const ENUMLEN_COLORENUM = 3;
// later on
if(currentColor === ENUM_COLORENUM_RED) {
// whatever
}
Here is how I remember when to use INDEX_ and when to use ENUM_:
// Precondition: var arr = []; //
arr[INDEX_] = ENUM_;
However, ENUM_ can, in certain circumstances, be appropriate as an index such as when counting the occurrences of each item.
const ENUM_PET_CAT = 0,
ENUM_PET_DOG = 1,
ENUM_PET_RAT = 2,
ENUMLEN_PET = 3;
var favoritePets = [ENUM_PET_CAT, ENUM_PET_DOG, ENUM_PET_RAT,
ENUM_PET_DOG, ENUM_PET_DOG, ENUM_PET_CAT,
ENUM_PET_RAT, ENUM_PET_CAT, ENUM_PET_DOG];
var petsFrequency = [];
for (var i=0; i<ENUMLEN_PET; i=i+1|0)
petsFrequency[i] = 0;
for (var i=0, len=favoritePets.length|0, petId=0; i<len; i=i+1|0)
petsFrequency[petId = favoritePets[i]|0] = (petsFrequency[petId]|0) + 1|0;
console.log({
"cat": petsFrequency[ENUM_PET_CAT],
"dog": petsFrequency[ENUM_PET_DOG],
"rat": petsFrequency[ENUM_PET_RAT]
});Observe that, in the code above, it's really easy to add in a new kind of pet: you would just have to append a new entry after ENUM_PET_RAT and update ENUMLEN_PET accordingly. It might be more difficult and buggy to add a new entry in other systems of enumeration.
Additionally, this syntax of enumerations allows for clear and concise class extending as seen below. To extend a class, add an incrementing number to the LEN_ entry of the parent class. Then, finish out the subclass with its own LEN_ entry so that the subclass may be extended further in the future.
(function(window){
"use strict";
var parseInt = window.parseInt;
// use INDEX_ when representing the index in an array instance
const INDEX_PIXELCOLOR_TYPE = 0, // is a ENUM_PIXELTYPE
INDEXLEN_PIXELCOLOR = 1,
INDEX_SOLIDCOLOR_R = INDEXLEN_PIXELCOLOR+0,
INDEX_SOLIDCOLOR_G = INDEXLEN_PIXELCOLOR+1,
INDEX_SOLIDCOLOR_B = INDEXLEN_PIXELCOLOR+2,
INDEXLEN_SOLIDCOLOR = INDEXLEN_PIXELCOLOR+3,
INDEX_ALPHACOLOR_R = INDEXLEN_PIXELCOLOR+0,
INDEX_ALPHACOLOR_G = INDEXLEN_PIXELCOLOR+1,
INDEX_ALPHACOLOR_B = INDEXLEN_PIXELCOLOR+2,
INDEX_ALPHACOLOR_A = INDEXLEN_PIXELCOLOR+3,
INDEXLEN_ALPHACOLOR = INDEXLEN_PIXELCOLOR+4,
// use ENUM_ when representing a mutually-exclusive species or type
ENUM_PIXELTYPE_SOLID = 0,
ENUM_PIXELTYPE_ALPHA = 1,
ENUM_PIXELTYPE_UNKNOWN = 2,
ENUMLEN_PIXELTYPE = 2;
function parseHexColor(inputString) {
var rawstr = inputString.trim().substring(1);
var result = [];
if (rawstr.length === 8) {
result[INDEX_PIXELCOLOR_TYPE] = ENUM_PIXELTYPE_ALPHA;
result[INDEX_ALPHACOLOR_R] = parseInt(rawstr.substring(0,2), 16);
result[INDEX_ALPHACOLOR_G] = parseInt(rawstr.substring(2,4), 16);
result[INDEX_ALPHACOLOR_B] = parseInt(rawstr.substring(4,6), 16);
result[INDEX_ALPHACOLOR_A] = parseInt(rawstr.substring(4,6), 16);
} else if (rawstr.length === 4) {
result[INDEX_PIXELCOLOR_TYPE] = ENUM_PIXELTYPE_ALPHA;
result[INDEX_ALPHACOLOR_R] = parseInt(rawstr[0], 16) * 0x11;
result[INDEX_ALPHACOLOR_G] = parseInt(rawstr[1], 16) * 0x11;
result[INDEX_ALPHACOLOR_B] = parseInt(rawstr[2], 16) * 0x11;
result[INDEX_ALPHACOLOR_A] = parseInt(rawstr[3], 16) * 0x11;
} else if (rawstr.length === 6) {
result[INDEX_PIXELCOLOR_TYPE] = ENUM_PIXELTYPE_SOLID;
result[INDEX_SOLIDCOLOR_R] = parseInt(rawstr.substring(0,2), 16);
result[INDEX_SOLIDCOLOR_G] = parseInt(rawstr.substring(2,4), 16);
result[INDEX_SOLIDCOLOR_B] = parseInt(rawstr.substring(4,6), 16);
} else if (rawstr.length === 3) {
result[INDEX_PIXELCOLOR_TYPE] = ENUM_PIXELTYPE_SOLID;
result[INDEX_SOLIDCOLOR_R] = parseInt(rawstr[0], 16) * 0x11;
result[INDEX_SOLIDCOLOR_G] = parseInt(rawstr[1], 16) * 0x11;
result[INDEX_SOLIDCOLOR_B] = parseInt(rawstr[2], 16) * 0x11;
} else {
result[INDEX_PIXELCOLOR_TYPE] = ENUM_PIXELTYPE_UNKNOWN;
}
return result;
}
// the red component of green
console.log(parseHexColor("#0f0")[INDEX_SOLIDCOLOR_R]);
// the alpha of transparent purple
console.log(parseHexColor("#f0f7")[INDEX_ALPHACOLOR_A]);
// the enumerated array for turquoise
console.log(parseHexColor("#40E0D0"));
})(self);(Length: 2,450 bytes)
Some may say that this is less practical than other solutions: it wastes tons of space, it takes a long time to write, and it is not coated with sugar syntax. Those people would be right if they do not minify their code. However, no reasonable person would leave unminified code in the end product. For this minification, Closure Compiler is the best I have yet to find. Online access can be found here. Closure compiler is able to take all of this enumeration data and inline it, making your Javascript be super duper small and run super duper fast. Thus, Minify with Closure Compiler. Observe.
Closure compiler is able to perform some pretty incredible optimizations via inferences that are way beyond the capacities of any other Javascript minifier. Closure Compiler is able to inline primitive variables set to a fixed value. Closure Compiler is also able to make inferences based upon these inlined values and eliminate unused blocks in if-statements and loops.
'use strict';(function(e){function d(a){a=a.trim().substring(1);var b=[];8===a.length?(b[0]=1,b[1]=c(a.substring(0,2),16),b[2]=c(a.substring(2,4),16),b[3]=c(a.substring(4,6),16),b[4]=c(a.substring(4,6),16)):4===a.length?(b[1]=17*c(a[0],16),b[2]=17*c(a[1],16),b[3]=17*c(a[2],16),b[4]=17*c(a[3],16)):6===a.length?(b[0]=0,b[1]=c(a.substring(0,2),16),b[2]=c(a.substring(2,4),16),b[3]=c(a.substring(4,6),16)):3===a.length?(b[0]=0,b[1]=17*c(a[0],16),b[2]=17*c(a[1],16),b[3]=17*c(a[2],16)):b[0]=2;return b}var c=
e.parseInt;console.log(d("#0f0")[1]);console.log(d("#f0f7")[4]);console.log(d("#40E0D0"))})(self);(Length: 605 bytes)
Closure Compiler rewards you for coding smarter and organizing your code well because, whereas many minifiers punish organized code with a bigger minified file size, Closure Compiler is able to sift through all your cleanliness and sanity to output an even smaller file size if you use tricks like variable name enumerations. That, in this one mind, is the holy grail of coding: a tool that both assists your code with a smaller minified size and assists your mind by training better programming habits.
Now, let us see how big the equivalent file would be without any of these enumerations.
Source Without Using Enumerations (length: 1,973 bytes (477 bytes shorter than enumerated code!))
Minified Without Using Enumerations (length: 843 bytes (238 bytes longer than enumerated code))
As seen, without enumerations, the source code is shorter at the cost of a larger minified code. I do not know about you; but I know for sure that I do not incorporate source code into the end product. Thus, this form of enumerations is far superior insomuch that it results in smaller minified file sizes.
Another advantage about this form of enumeration is that it can be used to easily manage large scale projects without sacrificing minified code size. When working on a large project with lots of other people, it might be beneficial to explicitly mark and label the variable names with who created the code so that the original creator of the code can be quickly identified for collaborative bug fixing.
// JG = Jack Giffin
const ENUM_JG_COLORENUM_RED = 0,
ENUM_JG_COLORENUM_GREEN = 1,
ENUM_JG_COLORENUM_BLUE = 2,
ENUMLEN_JG_COLORENUM = 3;
// later on
if(currentColor === ENUM_JG_COLORENUM_RED) {
// whatever
}
// PL = Pepper Loftus
// BK = Bob Knight
const ENUM_PL_ARRAYTYPE_UNSORTED = 0,
ENUM_PL_ARRAYTYPE_ISSORTED = 1,
ENUM_BK_ARRAYTYPE_CHUNKED = 2, // added by Bob Knight
ENUM_JG_ARRAYTYPE_INCOMPLETE = 3, // added by jack giffin
ENUMLEN_PL_COLORENUM = 4;
// later on
if(
randomArray === ENUM_PL_ARRAYTYPE_UNSORTED ||
randomArray === ENUM_BK_ARRAYTYPE_CHUNKED
) {
// whatever
}
Further, this form of enumeration is also much faster after minification. In normal named properties, the browser has to use hashmaps to look up where the property is on the object. Although JIT compilers intelligently cache this location on the object, there is still tremendous overhead due to special cases such as deleting a lower property from the object.
But, with continuous non-sparse integer-indexed PACKED_ELEMENTS arrays, the browser is able to skip much of that overhead because the index of the value in the internal array is already specified. Yes, according to the ECMAScript standard, all properties are supposed to be treated as strings. Nevertheless, this aspect of the ECMAScript standard is very misleading about performance because all browsers have special optimizations for numeric indexes in arrays.
/// Hashmaps are slow, even with JIT juice
var ref = {};
ref.count = 10;
ref.value = "foobar";
Compare the code above to the code below.
/// Arrays, however, are always lightning fast
const INDEX_REFERENCE_COUNT = 0;
const INDEX_REFERENCE_VALUE = 1;
const INDEXLENGTH_REFERENCE = 2;
var ref = [];
ref[INDEX_REFERENCE_COUNT] = 10;
ref[INDEX_REFERENCE_VALUE] = "foobar";
One might object to the code with enumerations seeming to be much longer than the code with ordinary objects, but looks can be deceiving. It is important to remember that source code size is not proportional to output size when using the epic Closure Compiler. Observe.
/// Hashmaps are slow, even with JIT juice
var a={count:10,value:"foobar"};
The minified code without enumerations is above and the minified code with enumerations is below.
/// Arrays, however, are always lightning fast
var a=[10,"foobar"];
The example above demonstrates that, in addition to having superior performance, the enumerated code also results in a smaller minified file size.
Furthermore, this one's personal cherry on the top is using this form of enumerations along with the CodeMirror text editor in Javascript mode. CodeMirror's Javascript syntax highlighting mode highlights local variables in the current scope. That way, you know instantly when you type in a variable name correctly because if the variable name was previously declared with the var keyword, then the variable name turns a special color (cyan by default). Even if you do not use CodeMirror, then at least the browser throws a helpful [variable name] is not defined exception when executing code with mistyped enumeration names. Also, JavaScript tools such as JSLint and Closure Compiler are very loud about telling you when you mistype in an enumeration variable name. CodeMirror, the browser, and various Javascript tools put together make debugging this form of enumeration very simple and really easy.
const ENUM_COLORENUM_RED = 0,
ENUM_COLORENUM_GREEN = 1,
ENUM_COLORENUM_BLUE = 2,
ENUMLEN_COLORENUM = 3;
var currentColor = ENUM_COLORENUM_GREEN;
if(currentColor === ENUM_COLORENUM_RED) {
// whatever
}
if(currentColor === ENUM_COLORENUM_DNE) {
// whatever
}In the above snippet, you were alerted with an error because ENUM_COLORENUM_DNE does not exist.
I think its safe to say that this methodology of enumeration is indeed the best way to go not just for minified code size, but also for performance, debugging, and collaboration.
I wasn't satisfied with any of the answers, so I made Yet Another Enum (YEA!).
This implementation:
colors.RED), string (colors["RED"]), and index (colors[0]), but you only need to pass in the strings as an arraytoString() and valueOf() functions to each enum object (if this is somehow not desired, one can simply remove it - small overhead for JS though)Special thanks to Andre 'Fi''s answer for some inspiration.
The codes:
class Enums {
static create({ name = undefined, items = [] }) {
let newEnum = {};
newEnum.length = items.length;
newEnum.items = items;
for (let itemIndex in items) {
//Map by name.
newEnum[items[itemIndex]] = parseInt(itemIndex, 10);
//Map by index.
newEnum[parseInt(itemIndex, 10)] = items[itemIndex];
}
newEnum.toString = Enums.enumToString.bind(newEnum);
newEnum.valueOf = newEnum.toString;
//Optional naming and global registration.
if (name != undefined) {
newEnum.name = name;
Enums[name] = newEnum;
}
//Prevent modification of the enum object.
Object.freeze(newEnum);
return newEnum;
}
static enumToString() {
return "Enum " +
(this.name != undefined ? this.name + " " : "") +
"[" + this.items.toString() + "]";
}
}
Usage:
let colors = Enums.create({
name: "COLORS",
items: [ "RED", "GREEN", "BLUE", "PORPLE" ]
});
//Global access, if named.
Enums.COLORS;
colors.items; //Array(4) [ "RED", "GREEN", "BLUE", "PORPLE" ]
colors.length; //4
colors.RED; //0
colors.GREEN; //1
colors.BLUE; //2
colors.PORPLE; //3
colors[0]; //"RED"
colors[1]; //"GREEN"
colors[2]; //"BLUE"
colors[3]; //"PORPLE"
colors.toString(); //"Enum COLORS [RED,GREEN,BLUE,PORPLE]"
//Enum frozen, makes it a real enum.
colors.RED = 9001;
colors.RED; //0
This can be useful:
const [CATS, DOGS, BIRDS] = ENUM();
The implementation is simple and efficient:
function * ENUM(count=1) { while(true) yield count++ }
A generator can yield the exact sequence of integers required, without knowing how many constants there are. It can also support an optional argument that specifies which (possibly negative) number to start from (defaulting to 1).
This is how Typescript translates it's enum into Javascript:
var makeEnum = function(obj) {
obj[ obj['Active'] = 1 ] = 'Active';
obj[ obj['Closed'] = 2 ] = 'Closed';
obj[ obj['Deleted'] = 3 ] = 'Deleted';
}
Now:
makeEnum( NewObj = {} )
// => {1: "Active", 2: "Closed", 3: "Deleted", Active: 1, Closed: 2, Deleted: 3}
At first I was confused why obj[1] returns 'Active', but then realised that its dead simple - Assignment operator assigns value and then returns it:
obj['foo'] = 1
// => 1
class Enum {
constructor (...vals) {
vals.forEach( val => {
const CONSTANT = Symbol(val);
Object.defineProperty(this, val.toUpperCase(), {
get () {
return CONSTANT;
},
set (val) {
const enum_val = "CONSTANT";
// generate TypeError associated with attempting to change the value of a constant
enum_val = val;
}
});
});
}
}
Example of usage:
const COLORS = new Enum("red", "blue", "green");
Update 05.11.2020:
Modified to include static fields and methods to closer replicate "true" enum behavior.
Has anyone tried doing this with a class that contains private fields and "get" accessors? I realize private class fields are still experimental at this point but it seems to work for the purposes of creating a class with immutable fields/properties. Browser support is decent as well. The only "major" browsers that don't support it are Firefox (which I'm sure they will soon) and IE (who cares).
DISCLAIMER:
I am not a developer. I was just looking for an answer to this question and started thinking about how I sometimes create "enhanced" enums in C# by creating classes with private fields and restricted property accessors.
Sample Class
class Sizes {
// Private Fields
static #_SMALL = 0;
static #_MEDIUM = 1;
static #_LARGE = 2;
// Accessors for "get" functions only (no "set" functions)
static get SMALL() { return this.#_SMALL; }
static get MEDIUM() { return this.#_MEDIUM; }
static get LARGE() { return this.#_LARGE; }
}
You should now be able to call your enums directly.
Sizes.SMALL; // 0
Sizes.MEDIUM; // 1
Sizes.LARGE; // 2
The combination of using private fields and limited accessors means that the enum values are well protected.
Sizes.SMALL = 10 // Sizes.SMALL is still 0
Sizes._SMALL = 10 // Sizes.SMALL is still 0
Sizes.#_SMALL = 10 // Sizes.SMALL is still 0
You just need to make an immutable object by using Object.freeze(<your_object>):
export const ColorEnum = Object.freeze({
// you can only change the property values here
// in the object declaration like in the Java enumaration
RED: 0,
GREEN: 1,
BLUE: 2,
});
ColorEnum.RED = 22 // assigning here will throw an error
ColorEnum.VIOLET = 45 // even adding a new property will throw an error
Read all the answers and didn't found any non-verbose and DRY solution. I use this one-liner:
const modes = ['DRAW', 'SCALE', 'DRAG'].reduce((o, v) => ({ ...o, [v]: v }), {});
it generates an object with human-readable values:
{
DRAW: 'DRAW',
SCALE: 'SCALE',
DRAG: 'DRAG'
}
This answer is an alternative approach for specific circumstances. I needed a set of bitmask constants based on attribute sub-values (cases where an attribute value is an array or list of values). It encompasses the equivalent of several overlapping enums.
I created a class to both store and generate the bitmask values. I can then use the pseudo-constant bitmask values this way to test, for example, if green is present in an RGB value:
if (value & Ez.G) {...}
In my code I create only one instance of this class. There doesn't seem to be a clean way to do this without instantiating at least one instance of the class. Here is the class declaration and bitmask value generation code:
class Ez {
constructor() {
let rgba = ["R", "G", "B", "A"];
let rgbm = rgba.slice();
rgbm.push("M"); // for feColorMatrix values attribute
this.createValues(rgba);
this.createValues(["H", "S", "L"]);
this.createValues([rgba, rgbm]);
this.createValues([attX, attY, attW, attH]);
}
createValues(a) { // a for array
let i, j;
if (isA(a[0])) { // max 2 dimensions
let k = 1;
for (i of a[0]) {
for (j of a[1]) {
this[i + j] = k;
k *= 2;
}
}
}
else { // 1D array is simple loop
for (i = 0, j = 1; i < a.length; i++, j *= 2)
this[a[i]] = j;
}
}
The 2D array is for the SVG feColorMatrix values attribute, which is a 4x5 matrix of RGBA by RGBAM, where M is a multiplier. The resulting Ez properties are Ez.RR, Ez.RG, etc.
export const ButtonType = Object.freeze({
DEFAULT: 'default',
BIG: 'big',
SMALL: 'small'
})
source: https://medium.com/@idanlevi2/enum-in-javascript-5f2ff500f149
Here's my take on a (flagged) Enum factory. Here's a working demo.
/*
* Notes:
* The proxy handler enables case insensitive property queries
* BigInt is used to enable bitflag strings /w length > 52
*/
function EnumFactory() {
const proxyfy = {
construct(target, args) {
const caseInsensitiveHandler = {
get(target, key) {
return target[key.toUpperCase()] || target[key];
}
};
const proxified = new Proxy(new target(...args), caseInsensitiveHandler );
return Object.freeze(proxified);
},
}
const ProxiedEnumCtor = new Proxy(EnumCtor, proxyfy);
const throwIf = (
assertion = false,
message = `Unspecified error`,
ErrorType = Error ) =>
assertion && (() => { throw new ErrorType(message); })();
const hasFlag = (val, sub) => {
throwIf(!val || !sub, "valueIn: missing parameters", RangeError);
const andVal = (sub & val);
return andVal !== BigInt(0) && andVal === val;
};
function EnumCtor(values) {
throwIf(values.constructor !== Array ||
values.length < 2 ||
values.filter( v => v.constructor !== String ).length > 0,
`EnumFactory: expected Array of at least 2 strings`, TypeError);
const base = BigInt(1);
this.NONE = BigInt(0);
values.forEach( (v, i) => this[v.toUpperCase()] = base<<BigInt(i) );
}
EnumCtor.prototype = {
get keys() { return Object.keys(this).slice(1); },
subset(sub) {
const arrayValues = this.keys;
return new ProxiedEnumCtor(
[...sub.toString(2)].reverse()
.reduce( (acc, v, i) => ( +v < 1 ? acc : [...acc, arrayValues[i]] ), [] )
);
},
getLabel(enumValue) {
const tryLabel = Object.entries(this).find( value => value[1] === enumValue );
return !enumValue || !tryLabel.length ?
"getLabel: no value parameter or value not in enum" :
tryLabel.shift();
},
hasFlag(val, sub = this) { return hasFlag(val, sub); },
};
return arr => new ProxiedEnumCtor(arr);
}
I was searching for an answer to this question too & found this page with an answer that I think seams to be different from most answers here: https://www.sohamkamani.com/javascript/enums/
I will copy over the answer part of the article to here, just in case the link gets invalid in the future or something:
Enums with Symbols:
Symbols let us define values that are guaranteed not to collide with one another.
For example:
const Summer1 = Symbol("summer")
const Summer2 = Symbol("summer")
// Even though they have the same apparent value
// Summer1 and Summer2 don't equate
console.log(Summer1 === Summer2)
// false
console.log(Summer1)
We can define our enums using Symbols to ensure that they are not duplicated:
const Summer = Symbol("summer")
const Autumn = Symbol("autumn")
const Winter = Symbol("winter")
const Spring = Symbol("spring")
let season = Spring
switch (season) {
case Summer:
console.log('the season is summer')
break;
case Winter:
console.log('the season is winter')
break;
case Spring:
console.log('the season is spring')
break;
case Autumn:
console.log('the season is autumn')
break;
default:
console.log('season not defined')
}
Using Symbols ensures that the only way we can assign an enum value is by using the constants that we defined initially.
Enums with Classes:
To make our code more semantically correct, we can create a class to hold groups of enums.
For example, our seasons should have a way for us to identify that they all belong to a similar classification.
Let’s see how we can use classes and objects to create distinct enum groups:
// Season enums can be grouped as static members of a class
class Season {
// Create new instances of the same class as static attributes
static Summer = new Season("summer")
static Autumn = new Season("autumn")
static Winter = new Season("winter")
static Spring = new Season("spring")
constructor(name) {
this.name = name
}
}
// Now we can access enums using namespaced assignments
// this makes it semantically clear that "Summer" is a "Season"
let season = Season.Summer
// We can verify whether a particular variable is a Season enum
console.log(season instanceof Season)
// true
console.log(Symbol('something') instanceof Season)
//false
// We can explicitly check the type based on each enums class
console.log(season.constructor.name)
// 'Season'
personal note: I would have used this constructor instead: (Note: sets: this.name, to a string instead of an object, looses some of the verifications below. Optionally remove the: .description. I would also like to find a way to not have to type Seasons.summer.name but instead only need: Seasons.summer to make it return a string)
constructor(name) {
this.name = Symbol(name).description
}
Listing All Possible Enum Values:
If we used the class-based approach above, we can loop through the keys of the Season class to obtain all the enum values under the same group:
Object.keys(Season).forEach(season => console.log("season:", season))
// season: Summer
// season: Autumn
// season: Winter
// season: Spring
When to Use Enums in Javascript?
In general, enums are helpful if there are a definite number of fixed values for any one variable_
For example, the crypto standard library for Node.js has a list of supported algorithms, that can be considered an enum group.
Using enums in Javascript correctly will lead to better code that is more stable, easier to read and less error prone.