Developing a project in Javascript > NP-Incompleteness > Developing a project in Javascript

Developing a project in Javascript

15 Feb 2016

I’ve worked with several small Javascript side-projects. The amount of Javascript libraries and frameworks is overwhelming, especially in recent times.

In the past, I would write a couple of stand-alone Javascript files from scratch. As applications get bigger and more complex, new libraries for improving project development have been created.

I decided to look around for best practices to develop open source JavaScript applications these days. This post is a set of notes describing my findings.

We’ll discuss libraries that solves different needs for software projects including libraries, modularization, automated building, linter and finally testing frameworks.



Javascript doesn’t have an official package management. There has been an effort to standartize how Javascript libraries are distributed. With Node.js, came its package manager that npm (node package manager), that was initially indented for Node.js packages, but can also be used for general libraries, independent of Node.js itself.

To work with npm, we need to write a configuration file, called package.json. In this file, which is a JSON, we can define metadata when building a library, including title, version and the dependencies of other libraries. A sample configuration looks like this:

  "name": "my_project",
  "version": "0.0.1",
  "description": "Description of my project",
  "devDependencies": {
    "browserify": "~5.11.0",
    "uglifyify": "^2.5.0"


In the dependencies, we have to specify the versions. A version (more specifically semantic version or semver) consists of three parts numbers separated by '.'. The last number should be bumped on small changes, like bug fixes, without change on functionality. The middle number, aka minor version, should be bumped whenever new features are added, but that are back-compatible. Finally, the first number, aka major version, should be bumped whenever back-incompatible changes are made [1].

In package.json, you can specify a hard-coded version number or be more relaxed. If we use the '~' in front of the version, for example ~5.11.0, it means we accept the most recent version of form 5.11.x. On the other hand, if we use the '^', for example ^2.5.0, we accept the most recent version of the form 2.x.x.

The dependencies of a package can be either production or development dependencies. In our case, browserify and uglify are only used for building our package and not a dependency our code has, so it doesn’t make sense to ship those to the user of the library.

To parse the configuration in package.json, we can run:

npm install --save-dev

This will download the dependencies listed under devDependencies locally in the directory node_modules (created in the same directory the package.json is). To run the production dependencies, we can do:

npm install --save


Modules are useful for splitting code in related units and enables reuse. JavaScript doesn’t have a native module system, so some libraries were built to address the modularization problem. There are three main types of module systems around: AMD (Asynchronous Module Definition), CommonJS and the ES6 loader. Addy Osmani discusses the differences between those in [2].

There are several implementations for modules, including RequireJS (AMD), browserify (uses the node.js module system, which uses CommonJS). SystemJS is able to work with all these different types.

I had been working with browserify, but it seems better to adopt the ES6 standards, so I’ve switched to SystemJS. Another advantage of SystemJS is that is also allows ES6 syntax by transpiling the code using BabelJS.

To use SystemJS we need to define a configuration file (analogous to package.json), named config.js (don’t worry about it for now).


Named exports. We can have multiple export statements within a single file or provide all exports within a single statement [3]. Example:

 * my_module.js
function foo() {
function bar() {
// Nested export
export {
  // baz is what will be available externally
  bar as baz,
// Flat, inline export
export function derp() {

Default exports. We can export default items in a module (the reason will be clear when we talk about importing next). We show the syntax for both the inline and the named exports:

// Nested
export {
  foo as default,
// Inline export
export default function() {


We have 3 basic ways to import from a module.

  1. Name all items we want to pick from the module.
import {foo, baz as 'bar'} from 'my_module';
  1. Do not provide any specific item, in which case we’ll import the default export:
import the_default_export from 'my_module';
// Equivalent to
import {default as 'the_default_export'} from 'my_module'
  1. Import all item from the module under a ‘namespace’, basically
import * as everything from 'my_module'
// 'everything' is an object
// {
//    foo,
//    baz,
//    default,
//    derp
// }

NPM Packages

To be able to import NPM packages, we have to download them first and for that we can use the tool. For example, I was interested in the point-in-polygon package. Instead of running the npm command, we can use jspm:

// Download jspm
npm install --global jspm
// Install the desired npm package
jspm install npm:point-in-polygon

Running jspm will write to the config.js file (it creates one if it doesn’t exist). This will write a map from where the module got installed and the name you can use in code to import it. Since npm packages use the CommonJS syntax and SystemJS understands it, in code we can simply do:

import {default as pointInsidePolygon} from 'point-in-polygon';


The process of running commands like SystemJS can be automated. One idea is writing Makefiles to run command line. Another option is to use JavaScript frameworka, such as Grunt and Gulp. In this post we’ll stick to Grunt.

To configure a build, we need to provide another configuration file, called Gruntfile.js (should live in the same directory as the package.json). You provide an object to grunt.initConfig(), which contains tasks configurations.

module.exports = function(grunt) {

  var taskList = ['systemjs', 'uglify'];

    pkg: grunt.file.readJSON('package.json'),
    systemjs: {
        options: {
            'configFile': './config.js'
        dist: {
            'src': '<root JS file>',
            'dest': '<compiled file with all dependencies together>'

  grunt.registerTask('default', ['systemjs']);

With grunt.registerTask('default', ['systemjs']) we’re telling grunt to run the systemjs task whenever we run grunt from the command line.

It’s possible to run grunt automatically upon changes to JS files via the watch task. First, we need to install the plugin:

npm install grunt-contrib-watch --save-dev

Then we configure it in Gruntfile.js:

    watch: {
      browser_js: {
        files: ['**/*.js', '!node_modules/**/*', '!dist/**/*'],
        tasks: taskList,

Here taskList is an array of task names. It can be the same one provided to the default task. Make sure to blacklist some directories like dist, which is the output directory of the systemjs task (otherwise we’ll get an infinite loop). Finally we run:

grunt watch

Now, whenever we perform a change to any JS file it will run the task.


Since Javascript code is interpreted on the client (browser), the source code must be downloaded from the server. Having a large source code is not efficient from a network perspective, so often these libraries are available as a minified file (often with extension min.js to differentiate from the unminified version).

The source code can be compressed by removing extra spaces, renaming variables, etc, without changing the program. One popular tool to achieve this is UglifyJS.

To use it with Grunt, we can install the grunt-contrib-uglify module:

npm install grunt-contrib-uglify --save-dev

And in our Gruntfile.js:

    uglify: {
        compact: {
            files: {
                './dist/<project>.min.js': ['./dist/<project>.js']
grunt.registerTask('default', ['systemjs', 'uglify']);


Lint tools help us avoiding bugs, sticking to code conventions and improving code quality. One popular tool for linting is jshint. Other alternatives include jslint. JSHint has a Grunt plugin:

    jshint: {
        files: [
        options: {
            'esnext': true,
grunt.registerTask('lint', ['jshint']);

The basic configuration here makes sure to blacklist “production” directories like node_module and dist. Also, since we’ve been adopting ES6, we can set the esnext flag to tell jshint to account for the new syntax.

We probably don’t want to run the lint every time we update the JS file. We can run it less often, for example before sending code for review. Thus, we can create a separate registry for it using grunt.registerTask('lint', ['jshint']). We can now run jshint via the command line:

grunt lint


Another practice to avoid bugs is testing, including unit tests. Again, there are several libraries and frameworks that makes the job of unit testing less painful, for example easy ways to mock dependencies so we can test isolated functionality. In this case, I’ve picked Jest, which has a grunt task available in npm, which we can install via:

npm install grunt-jest --save-dev

(NOTE: this will also install the jest-cli binary which depends on a Node.js version >= 4, so you might need to update your Node.js).

We can configure the grunt task with default configs in the following way:

    jest: {

With this setup we can run the following command to run jest tests:

grunt jest

Unfortunately, jest uses the CommonJS require syntax. It used to be possible to use babel-jest but after version 5.0 this setup doesn’t work anymore.


The JavaScript environment changes extremely fast and it’s very hard to keep on top of the latest frameworks/practices, etc.

To make things worse, for every task like module system, linting, testing, there are many alternatives and none of them is a clear best choice.

I’m happy that there’s an effort of standardization with ES6. I think the more we stick to one convention the more we reduce re-inventing the wheel, the less syntax differences to learn, etc.


Further Reading

Generation Javascript. Manuel Bernhardt discusses the current state of JavaScript libraries and how the low friction nature of developing in JavaScript has its downsides.

Essential JavaScript Links. Eric Elliott’s list of links to several books, articles and tools concerning to JavaScript. It provides a much more comprehensive list of options for the different topics we covered in this post.