Determining Object Type with MooTools’ typeOf

By  on  

One thing about JavaScript I dislike is the vagueness of what the typeof operator returns. Pass typeof an array? You get "object" back (which it is, but a more concise answer would be helpful). Pass typeof a Date object? You get "object" again. What if there was a better way of determining an object's descriptive type? That's where the typeOf function within MooTools Core comes into play.

typeOf Source and Usage

The typeOf function is actually quite short:

var typeOf = this.typeOf = function(item){
	if (item == null) return 'null';
	if (item.$family) return item.$family();

	if (item.nodeName){
		if (item.nodeType == 1) return 'element';
		if (item.nodeType == 3) return (/\S/).test(item.nodeValue) ? 'textnode' : 'whitespace';
	} else if (typeof item.length == 'number'){
		if (item.callee) return 'arguments';
		if ('item' in item) return 'collection';
	}

	return typeof item;
};

typeOf checks for specific properties on the object in question to determine its descriptive type. Simple, right? Note the $family() check within typeOf; each Type (Array, Function, Date, etc.) instance is given a $family method which returns its type. Let's try a few typeOf calls:

typeof document.body;  // returns "object"
typeOf(document.body);  // returns "element"

typeof new Date();  // returns "object"
typeOf(new Date());  // returns "date"

typeof [];  // returns "object"
typeOf([]);  // returns "array"

typeOf is an awesome utility function, right? Getting a more detailed object type than simply "object" can be hugely help in validating the object before using it. typeOf is just another awesome utility within the MooTools JavaScript framework.

Recent Features

  • By
    Creating Scrolling Parallax Effects with CSS

    Introduction For quite a long time now websites with the so called "parallax" effect have been really popular. In case you have not heard of this effect, it basically includes different layers of images that are moving in different directions or with different speed. This leads to a...

  • By
    Vibration API

    Many of the new APIs provided to us by browser vendors are more targeted toward the mobile user than the desktop user.  One of those simple APIs the Vibration API.  The Vibration API allows developers to direct the device, using JavaScript, to vibrate in...

Incredible Demos

  • By
    CSS Sprites

    The idea of CSS sprites is pretty genius. For those of you who don't know the idea of a sprite, a sprite is basically multiple graphics compiled into one image. The advantages of using sprites are: Fewer images for the browser to download, which means...

  • By
    Animated AJAX Record Deletion Using Dojo

    I'm a huge fan of WordPress' method of individual article deletion. You click the delete link, the menu item animates red, and the item disappears. Here's how to achieve that functionality with Dojo JavaScript. The PHP - Content & Header The following snippet goes at the...

Discussion

  1. I use the regular “typeOf” to determine if classes are present, but the MooTools typeOf is much better, and great for making sure variables are the correct type. I wish more plugin coders would return robust error messages with these kinds of checks.

  2. Nice one !!!!!!

  3. Lorenzo

    Anyone knows if Mootools’ typeOf is more reliable than standard typeof when I want to check if something is a function or not?

    var a = (function() { return true; });
    var b = { name: 'value' };
    // typeof(a) == typeOf(a) == 'function' is always TRUE?
    // typeof(b) == typeOf(b) != 'function' is always TRUE?
    
  4. Mootools supports another type check – the Type Object.
    Type.isNumber(var), Type.isObject() etc.

    This is nowhere in the docs (except once used in an example on the Array page). It is shorter and more semantic when you are checking for one type, don’t know why it is hidden.

Wrap your code in <pre class="{language}"></pre> tags, link to a GitHub gist, JSFiddle fiddle, or CodePen pen to embed!