Menu
My debugging work in IE ended today by finding that constructor.name is undefined.
I created the following simple code that reproduces the issue:
({}).constructor.name === undefined // => true
Is there any workaround to make this work?
Maybe overriding somehow the prototype?
If possible, I don't want to change the syntax, because the change would be major.
JSFIDDLE
445
Save this question. Show activity on this post. I wrote some Javascript code that works perfectly in all major browsers.
In JavaScript, multiple objects can be created in a constructor: //Constructor function User() { this.name = 'Bob'; } var user1 = new User(); var user2 = new User(); In the above example, two objects are created using the same constructor.
Assigning the constructor property to an object One can assign the constructor property of non-primitives. const arr = []; arr. constructor = String; arr. constructor === String; // true arr instanceof String; // false arr instanceof Array; // true const foo = new Foo(); foo.
Object() constructor The Object constructor turns the input into an object. Its behavior depends on the input's type. If the value is null or undefined , it creates and returns an empty object. Otherwise, it returns an object of a Type that corresponds to the given value.
From matt.scharley.me
/**
* Hack in support for Function.name for browsers that don't support it.
* IE, I'm looking at you.
**/
if (Function.prototype.name === undefined && Object.defineProperty !== undefined) {
Object.defineProperty(Function.prototype, 'name', {
get: function() {
var funcNameRegex = /function\s([^(]{1,})\(/;
var results = (funcNameRegex).exec((this).toString());
return (results && results.length > 1) ? results[1].trim() : "";
},
set: function(value) {}
});
}
The problem is simply that the name property of function objects is not supported in Internet Explorer. The property is non-standard (up until ECMAScript 6, at least) so it's not altogether surprising.
There isn't a completely reliable workaround so I would suggest trying to do without it if possible. However, you may be able to extract the name from the string representation of the function. Here a couple of links that deal with this that I got from a quick search:
Update
From the comments, it turns out that the goal of the question author is to test whether a variable is a reference to a plain object create by the Object constructor. A reliable way of doing this for a variable a is
Object.prototype.toString.call(a) == "[object Object]"
For more information I recommend the following page written by Angus Croll:
http://javascriptweblog.wordpress.com/2011/08/08/fixing-the-javascript-typeof-operator/
40
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With
