DEV Community

function or const, which do you prefer? (TypeScript/JavaScript)

Bobby Plunkett on April 15, 2022

When it comes to writing a function, which style do you prefer? const const doSomethingCool: string = () => 'yes' Enter fullscreen mo...

Read full post

JoelBonetR 🥇 • Apr 28 '22 • Edited

There are technical differences that should be considered over personal preferences:

const prevents reassignment of the name while function does not.
Using an arrow function doesn't have it's own lexical context, so it won't have a scoped this and can't be used as a constructor while function can be.
A const arrow function needs to be declared before calling it, otherwise it's undefined
A function can be declared after calling it.

Note you can also do:

const logWhatever = function( something ) { 
  console.log(something); 
}

Which both prevents reassignment and creates a lexical context.

So it's a matter of needs on a given point on your software.

Vit • Dec 1

Thank you for this comment. It's not obvious for some JS developers...

JoelBonetR 🥇 • Dec 1

Anytime 😄

David • Apr 18 '22

In React, I tend to use function for components and const for like onSubmit handlers within those components. Just feels better to me for some reason :)

Rense Bakker • Apr 24 '22

100% agree. Declaring your functions as functions is much easier to understand than having to read the whole line, to see if you're assinging an arrow function to that const. Arrow functions are great as a replacement for annonymous functions in callbacks.

JoelBonetR 🥇 • Apr 28 '22 • Edited

I think there's no need to read the whole line to know whether some const is a function or not.

 const myDog =

 const getUserById =

Read the comment I let above where I explain the technical insights on that so you can choose const or function whenever suits best 😊

Rense Bakker • Apr 28 '22

//Which is the function?
const alotofcharacters
function alotofcharacters

JoelBonetR 🥇 • Apr 28 '22

None of them should be. alotofcharacters is a subject so I'd expect to return just that (a lot of characters) after the evaluation.
Using a bad naming style/convention and blame a language feature is weird dude.

Rense Bakker • Apr 28 '22

facepalm alotofcharacters is not the name of the function... I should have replaced it with Chinese characters... How fast can you interpret Chinese?

Daniel Baharestani • Feb 21 '23 • Edited

While I agree that using the keyword function is more suitable to indicate the intention, I think @joelbonetr's point is also valid that following good naming convention serves the same purpose. Even if your function name is too long you don't need to read the name to the end to tell whether it's a function, if the name starts with a verb:

// First few characters are enough to tell which one is function
const getSomethingFromSomewhereUnderCertianConditions
const SomethingFromSomewhereUnderCertianConditions

Muhammad Harith Zainudin • Apr 17 '22

I prefer to use function instead of const, just because of it is directly referring to the function. and yes, it is much easy to read!

Robert Gres • Jan 23 '23

A few observations:

const doesn't prevent reassignments after it's imported in another module
lexical context doesn't matter unless this is used inside
sometimes procedural code is the best way to go, e.g. when writing scripts. Without hoisting it's all crap. Using function notation allows to invert code flow - to start from top-level calls and bindings on top and finish with details and junk at the bottom.
If you're improving performance or fixing memory leaks, good luck debugging call trees with all of those "anonymous" functions!

Tobani Esan-George • Dec 20 '22

I'm thinking of going back to the function statement, in react especially. Mostly because you can do export default function MyFunction but have to put the default export on another line with the const style of function declarations.

Ben Sinclair • May 5 '22

I tend to use the former (const) method, but I do think it can get out of hand, especially with typescript, and especially with the frankly terrible conventions for piling parentheses and braces and brackets and bears all together that Javascript developers tend to enjoy.

You end up with a 200-character line for a function definition, or split it over several at inconsistent points, where with the old-school method, everything's way more readable.

Julian Harris • Jan 5 '23 • Edited

I've written a bunch of code in the last 30 years in a bunch of languages. I was there when JavaScript was launched, and I understand as a slot-based language there's fundamentally no real distinction between "data slots" and "executable slots".

So I get why the const x: thing = () => {…} pattern exists, as part of that legacy.

The last time I was as confused by syntax was C++ templates which I never really understood. Typed arrow functions with templates are borderline impenetrably difficult IMHO. Check this (real world) function one of my team members wrote using using arrow syntax:

export const useSearchPhraseResolver: () => (searchPhrase: string) => Promise<SearchResultItem[]> = () => {}

vs the function syntax:

export function useSearchPhraseResolver(): (searchPhrase: string) => Promise<SearchResultItem[]> {}
(sorry I'd have put indenting etc but dev.to doesn't seem to have even the most rudimentary way to show code that I can figure out… )

You tell me which is easier to understand (and therefore which is less likely to introduce errors :) )

Sam Clark • Aug 16 '22

I highly doubt unless you're using something like web workers or node cluster either method will ever show a difference from the other. That being said, a declared function shows up differently in the AST.

Acid Coder • Dec 18 '22

const, no hoisting = no guessing = predictable

How Bizarre • Dec 15 '22

And last but not least, always think about what the garbage collector will do. Functions and constants have different meanings and conditions for the GBc and when to remove them from memory.

Kilian Sprotte • May 12

@howbizarre What are those? :)