Musings by @thedevel

Javascript Messaging Patterns - In Practice

1171 words · 10 Nov 2011

Addy Osmani wrote a very comprehension introduction (book) to JavaScript Design Patterns. This post is not intended to cover general patterns, but rather hightlight a couple messaging patterns and how they work and/or apply in a modularized application.

The landscape in JavaScript application development is actually quite clear these days. Although there seems to be an overwhelming number of new APIs and techniques to learn to keep up with modern JavaScript development, patterns typically remain the same in practice.


So what exactly do I mean by messaging patterns? Two common messaging patterns are the event-driven and publish/subscribe (PubSub) patterns. JavaScript has an event system built-in to use with the Document Object Model (DOM). That is, an event handler can be attached to an element and when some event (action) occurs on or to that element (click, mouse over, focus, etc.), the event handler is executed.

Pub/Sub is similar in this regard. Rather than an event, a topic is subscribed to by objects interested in the published content. Other objects may publish content for that topic in which case subscribers will receive this content.

They may sound identical aside from the spelling, but in practice they are used in very different contexts.


The event-driven pattern is not by any means limited to JavaScript's DOM API. Many JavaScript libraries impement their own event system for not-DOM objects. One example is the Backbone.js events module. The usually named suspects of the API include the bind, 'unbindandtrigger` methods. Under the hood each handler that is bound to a particular event is simply stored in array for that event. Whenenver that event is triggered, all event handlers are executed. Here are the ~50 minimal lines that make up the entire event system in Backbone.

The one thing to note with most event-driven systems is that event handlers are typically bound directly to those objects. Or to put it a different way, the bind, unbind and trigger methods exist on the objects themselves.

I point this out for two reasons:

  • Requiring objects' to have these methods means that not any object is event-_ready_
  • Object methods implies tight coupling, that is, if one object wants to bind an event handler to three different objects, it must reference those objects

When building large JavaScript applications, using this as your primary messaging pattern is a choice that will haunt you and your codebase in your days to come.


Great. I just ruined your day. So what is the solution? A solution is to used a more decoupled approach like the PubSub pattern. Rather than having multiple objects referencing multiple other objects and having a hard dependency on whether those referenced objects exist or not, a central hub is used. This hub contains the analogous methods subscribe, unsubscribe and publish.

The difference?

A single object acts as a message broker for publishers and subscribers. Publishers simply worry about publishing content, while other objects can subscribe to topics of interest and receive the published content when available. The job of the hub is keep track of both ends without requiring either end be aware of the other.

If an object publishing content throws an exception or fails to load, it does not break the subscribers since it did not need to directly reference and bind to the publisher. This enables a much more modular and decoupled approach to messaging in JavaScript.

In Practice

So where exactly is the dividing line for these patterns? Working with a full MVC (or MVVM) on the client seems much more intimidating than server-side MVC stacks. Why you ask? The DOM. It's really like a 4th layer since it has it's own APIs and constraints. You must use or interface with it at some point.

There are roughly three areas where a messaging pattern should be applied. The lowest level one that must be applied are the DOM event handlers. There is no getting around it. Luckily we have wonderful libraries like jQuery that abstract away all the misery of dealing with cross-browser inconsistencies between native DOM APIs.

Most Views (V of MVC) directly reference the DOM element they intend to represent and attach their own methods as the event handlers for the DOM events. This is good, abstractions are good.

The Model (M of MVC) side of things acts as the data source or store. This means that it must interface with the View (and thus the DOM elements) in some way. Controllers (C in MVC) typically fill that role for a given M-V pair. For a non-one-to-one relationship between model and view, many controllers can be defined for various combinations of these objects. In either direction when a view or model changes it's state a controller must be notified (or aware) of this change and react appropriately.


This is where a lightweight non-DOM event system, like Backbone's, comes in. Since a controller references particular objects (rather than a type of object) a tighter coupling may be appropriate in this scenario (though certainly not required).

As an aside, Backbone does not have a formal Controller class since the interface between a view and model tends to be quite minimal. This functionality can usually be added to the view which reduces the need to have a third formal object. From now on when you read "controller", it refers to the controller-like functionality rather than a formal object. Read more here:


Controllers are all fine and good for local objects (within the same view), but when we think about an application with multiple blocks of content and/or functionality on the page interactions between these objects begin to get very complex.

Think of it this way. Break up your web app into logical sections, i.e. which parts of the page can stand alone. This is sometimes a hard question to answer when thinking from an end-user's perspective since the whole page must work. Think of it from the stand point that if one of the parts of the page doesn't load correctly, should it really break the other parts of the page. At varying degrees that answer will also be no. These logical sections should be able to function independently of the other sections of the page, period.

Use PubSub.

Having a central object that's sole purpose is to keep track of the content publishers and subscribers will ensure a very decoupled and more dynamic implementation of your application. Take a look at my previous post on the PubSub pattern.

Some purists may complain and say.. well now your sprinkling a reference of the hub everywhere in your application. And I say, this is ok. It is an essential core object that must exist in order for your app to work.

But, if you really want to go down that road in JavaScript, go write an Actor model implementation.