JavaScript Design Patterns: Decorator Update

— 6 minute read

Yesterday's post drew a lot of traffic from Reddit and with it came some really good feedback. If you haven't read the previous post please do so first and then come back here.

I want to go through some of what was said so I can refine my examples and also clear up any confusion.

That prototype example sucked! permalink

OK let me start off by apologizing for even including that second example (the Sale decorators). It was meant as a kind of fun academic exercise but I tried to make it clear that I wasn't suggesting anyone actually implement it. Redditor gizmo490 pointed out that for the pattern to actually work you would have to overwrite all the methods of the Sale object or risk working in the wrong context. You can see our full discussion here.

So I'll just say if you're considering that second example: Stop. Just don't do it. It is way too much code.

We don't necessarily need all those objects permalink

Another Redditor, Draders, pointed out that the decorator objects aren't really necessary since we can just put functions directly into the decoratorsList.

// This is presuming that `add` pushes a function into the
// list of decorators
validator.add('zipcode', validateZipCodeFunction);

If you want validateZipCodeFunction to be reusable you'll have to define it somewhere and attaching it to the Validator object is probably a fine choice. In the end it's a bit less code so definitely something to think about.

Finally, the power of CLOSURES! permalink

Finally, and this is really the reason why I wanted to write this update, Redditor emehrkay pointed out that my examples are basically ignoring the power of JS functions and closures. In his quick and dirty example he shows how to achieve a similar goal with much less code:

function test(arg){
return arg + arg;

function testDecorator(fn, args){
var arg = args[0] * 2;

return fn(arg);

function decorate(dec, fn, args){
return function(){
return dec(fn, args);

x = decorate(testDecorator, test, [2])();

So here's my attempt to recreate the Sale example but using more of emehrkay's approach:

function Sale(price) {
this.price = price || 100;

Sale.prototype.getPrice = function() {
return this.price;

Sale.prototype.setPrice = function(price) {
this.price = price;

function usd(fn, context) {
var price =;
return "$" + price;

function decorate(dec, fn, context) {
return function() {
return, fn, context);

// Let's run it!
var sale = new Sale(50);

// Decorate our getPrice method. We'll just add
// some extra dollar signs to the output.
sale.getPrice = decorate(usd, sale.getPrice, sale);
sale.getPrice = decorate(usd, sale.getPrice, sale);
sale.getPrice = decorate(usd, sale.getPrice, sale);
console.log(sale.getPrice()); // output: $$$50

// Test to make sure other methods can still
// access the price in the correct context
console.log(sale.getPrice()); // output: $$$100

Since we're kind of mixing OO and functional style here the one caveat is that you have to pass the context to your decorators so when they call getPrice they know which instance they're referring to. So the code is a little funky but still interesting and if anyone can think of a way to write it cleaner I'm all ears!

Grab the Example Source