Use existing module object in bundle files created by browserify

Question

I have two files: a.js and b.js.

a.js:

console.log(require("./b.js")());
module.exports = function () {
   console.log("Hello Mars!");
};

b.js:

module.exports = function () {
    console.log("Hello World");
};

By bundling these files I obtain c.js:

browserify a.js -o c.js

I expect c.js to export a function (that prints Hello Mars when called). By requireing c.js in a node process I get an empty object.

$ node
> c = require("./c.js")
Hello World
undefined
{}
> c()
TypeError: c is not a function
    at repl:1:1
    at REPLServer.defaultEval (repl.js:252:27)
    at bound (domain.js:287:14)
    at REPLServer.runBound [as eval] (domain.js:300:12)
    at REPLServer.<anonymous> (repl.js:417:12)
    at emitOne (events.js:82:20)
    at REPLServer.emit (events.js:169:7)
    at REPLServer.Interface._onLine (readline.js:210:10)
    at REPLServer.Interface._line (readline.js:549:8)
    at REPLServer.Interface._ttyWrite (readline.js:826:14)

Since node has already a module object, how can I tell Browserify to use this module object for the main file, so I will get the Hello Mars function in the module.exports when using require in Node?

I checked out the docs, but I didn't find any option... Maybe I miss something.

I just want to bundle a module (that has dependencies) and require it in a node process.

Felix Kling · Accepted Answer · 2016-02-21 06:39:23Z

1

You are looking for the following option:

--standalone -s
Generate a UMD bundle for the supplied export name. This bundle works with other module systems and sets the name given as a window global if no module system is found.

You might also want to pass the --node option, to turn off the transformation of Node specific features.

answered Feb 21, 2016 at 6:39

Felix Kling

820k181 gold badges1.1k silver badges1.2k bronze badges

Sign up to request clarification or add additional context in comments.

3 Comments

Ionică Bizău Over a year ago

--node does something else, --require is expected to do this, but it doesn't work. And I also don't really want to create globals. Anyways, -s is the best one yet. Waiting for @substack feedback. :)

Felix Kling Over a year ago

What makes you think globals would be created? He option says "This bundle works with other module systems and sets the name given as a window global if no module system is found." Since Node does have a module system, it wouldn't create a global. As for --node: it includes --bare, which says: "This is handy if you want to run bundles in node". It seems that's exactly what you want to do. --require doesn't have anything to do with node.

Ionică Bizău Over a year ago

Right, in fact creating globals when there is no module system is not that bad, but still I search for an option that doesn't do that at all. I want to have export functionality in the bundle file but to not create any globals even when there is no module system. Anyways, accepting for now. :) Thanks a lot!

Collectives™ on Stack Overflow

Use existing module object in bundle files created by browserify

1 Answer 1

3 Comments

Your Answer

Hot Network Questions

Collectives™ on Stack Overflow

1 Answer 1

3 Comments

Your Answer

Sign up or log in

Post as a guest

Related