DEV Community


This binding in JavaScript – 6. Gotchas and final notes

Spyros Argalias
Specialising in front end development. I love programming and strive to be the best developer I can be.
Originally published at ・3 min read

This post (This binding in JavaScript – 6. Gotchas and final notes) was originally published on Sargalias.

In this series we talk about this binding in JavaScript.

This is a very important topic. It's also something that even experienced developers frequently get wrong and / or have to think about.

Basically in JavaScript there are 4 modes for this binding. Make that 5 if we include arrow functions.

In order of lowest priority to highest priority, here they are:

  1. Default binding
  2. Implicit binding
  3. Explicit binding
  4. New binding
  5. Arrow functions
  6. Gotchas and final notes

In this post we'll talk about some gotchas and final notes.


If you understand the rules we already spoke about regarding this binding, then you'll be fine. However there are some easy to miss cases with this binding that are probably worth mentioning.

Gotcha - Synchronous function references

This is the case we already examined in the default binding section.

Basically if we pass a function reference to a variable, and then call the function plain, without a "." before it, we lose our binding to this.

For example:

'use strict';

const obj = {
  foo() {

const foo =;
foo(); // logs out undefined
Enter fullscreen mode Exit fullscreen mode

Remember that we are calling the function plain, which results in default binding.

The thing that may be confusing is that we're passing the function reference However note that we're not actually calling it, we're not using (). Instead we call it later with foo().

Gotcha - Function references in timeouts

Another tricky case is if we pass function references to things like setTimeout. When we do this we also lose our binding to this.

Here is an example:

const obj = {
  foo() {

setTimeout(, 1000);
Enter fullscreen mode Exit fullscreen mode

What does the code above log to the console?

Answer: undefined

This is surprising at first.

However it's really the same thing as the previous example.

We're passing to setTimeout, so we might understandably think that implicit binding will occur and this will be bound to obj.

However that's not the case.

The important thing to realise is that we're not calling the function right then and there with

Instead we're just pointing to a function. The location of that function is

In the meantime, we can imagine that setTimeout has this kind of definition.

// Example setTimeout definition
function setTimeout(fn, ms) {
  // Wait ms miliseconds
Enter fullscreen mode Exit fullscreen mode

Note that inside our mock setTimeout implementation, we're calling the function plain.

Obviously the code for setTimeout is far more complicated, but the basic principle stays the same.

We are passing a function reference to setTimeout, we are not calling the function directly with the correct context.

The same applies to anything in JavaScript where we pass a function reference.

Further reading

If you want to learn more about this binding, the best resource I know of is You Don't Know JS: this & Object Prototypes by Kyle Simpson. You can buy it at or read it for free on GitHub

My thoughts on binding in JavaScript

This section is just my thoughts / rant on this binding in JavaScript.

In short, I don't like it.

The reason is because it goes against common programming principles such as the principle of least astonishment and abstraction.

Basically when we program, we do not want to be thinking about implementation details for handling this binding correctly. We're thinking at a level above those details, how to make our program work, not on how to handle the details of this.

Additionally it's a feature that I've never used positively in any context. It has always been a feature which has gotten in my way, never a feature that has helped out.

I mean, sure, it's an implementation detail that's probably required for us to have dynamic classes. However I think things would be much easier for developers if the rest of the this binding details were hidden from us.

Anyway, to combat this, I always default to using arrow functions, especially whenever this is involved and I don't want to deal with unexpected behaviour.

And... That's all. I hope you enjoyed this series.

Discussion (0)