Java Script code refactoring - hands on code

Let's see how we can create a mechanism that based on some flags; it will able to determine the status of some objects. The first version of code would look like this:

ItemStatus = {
    Status1: "Status1",
    Status2: "Status2",
    Status3: "Status3"
}();

ItemTypes = {
    Item1: "Item1",
    Item2: "Item2",
    Item3: "Item 3"
}();

var ItemConfiguration = function () {

    function ItemConfiguration() {

    }

    ItemConfiguration.prototype = function () {
        getItemConfiguration: function (itemTypes, flag1, flag2, flag3, flag4) {
            switch (itemTypes) {
                case ItemTypes.Item1:
                    if (flag1 && flag2) {
                        return ItemStatus.Status1;
                    } else if (flag3 || flag4) {
                        return ItemStatus.Status2;
                    }
                    break;
                case ItemTypes.Item2:
                    if (flag3 || flag2) {
                        return ItemStatus.Status3;
                    } else if (flag1 || flag2) {
                        return ItemStatus.Status1;
                    }
                    break;
                case ItemTypes.Item3:
                    if (flag3 || flag1 && flag3) {
                        return ItemStatus.Status1;
                    } else if (flag2 && flag4) {
                        return ItemStatus.Status3;
                    }
                    break;
            }
        }
    };
   
    return ItemConfiguration;
} ();

First problem is related to default values. If the flags combination from switch doesn’t return any value, that we should notify one way or another user about this issues. We end up throwing an expectation.

var ItemConfiguration = function () {

    function ItemConfiguration() {

    }

    ItemConfiguration.prototype = function () {
        getItemConfiguration: function (itemType, flag1, flag2, flag3, flag4) {
            switch (itemType) {
                case ItemTypes.Item1:
                    if (flag1 && flag2) {
                        return ItemStatus.Status1;
                    } else if (flag3 || flag4) {
                        return ItemStatus.Status2;
                    }
                    break;
                case ItemTypes.Item2:
                    if (flag3 || flag2) {
                        return ItemStatus.Status3;
                    } else if (flag1 || flag2) {
                        return ItemStatus.Status1;
                    }
                    break;
                case ItemTypes.Item3:
                    if (flag3 || flag1 && flag3) {
                        return ItemStatus.Status1;
                    } else if (flag2 && flag4) {
                        return ItemStatus.Status3;
                    }
                    break;
            }

            throw {
                message: "No flags matching for " + itemType + "with the flags combination"
                + "flag1: " + flag1 + ", "
                + "flag2: " + flag2 + ", "
                + "flag3: " + flag3 + ", "
                + "flag4: " + flag4 + ", "
            };
        }
    };

    return ItemConfiguration;
} ();

Almost okay we think. When we look over the requirements we notify that the user will need the status for all items. Because of this he will need to make 3 different calls. For each call he would need to add all the parameters over and over again. We can have two possible solutions. One is to create an object that has all this flags. The other option is to change our method to return the status for all our item types. I would go with the second approach.

var ItemConfiguration = function () {

    function ItemConfiguration() {

    }

    ItemConfiguration.prototype = function () {
        getItemsConfiguration: function(flag1, flag2, flag3, flag4) {
            var itemsStatus = new Object();
            itemsStatus[ItemTypes.Item1] = _getStatusForItem1(flag1, flag2, flag3, flag4);
            itemsStatus[ItemTypes.Item2] = _getStatusForItem2(flag1, flag2, flag3, flag4);
            itemsStatus[ItemTypes.Item3] = _getStatusForItem3(flag1, flag2, flag3, flag4);

            return itemsStatus;
        },

        _getStatusForItem1:function(flag1, flag2, flag3, flag4) {
            if (flag1 && flag2) {
                return ItemStatus.Status1;
            } else if (flag3 || flag4) {
                return ItemStatus.Status2;
            }

            _noStatusHandler();
        },

        _getStatusForItem2:function(flag1, flag2, flag3, flag4) {
            if (flag3 || flag2) {
                return ItemStatus.Status3;
            } else if (flag1 || flag2) {
                return ItemStatus.Status1;
            }

            _noStatusHandler();
        },

        _getStatusForItem3:function(flag1, flag2, flag3, flag4) {
            if (flag3 || flag1 && flag3) {
                return ItemStatus.Status1;
            } else if (flag2 && flag4) {
                return ItemStatus.Status3;
            }

            _noStatusHandler();
        },

        _noStatusHandler:function() {
            throw {
                message: "No flags matching for " + itemType + "with the flags combination"
                + "flag1: " + flag1 + ", "
                + "flag2: " + flag2 + ", "
                + "flag3: " + flag3 + ", "
                + "flag4: " + flag4 + ", "
            };
        }
    };

    return ItemConfiguration;
} ();

For each item type we extracted a method that calculates the item status. In the case for the input flags we cannot retrieve a status we throw an exception. In our public method, we create an object that contains our item types and status. In this way we removed the switch and the code looks better.
The thing that has a smell is the 4 parameters that are send each time in our private method. We could create an internal object with these 4 parameters and send it as parameter for each private method. Another option is to create 4 private fields and each private method can use them. Because we don’t have any problem with thread concurrency in JavaScript we can go with the second approach without any problem.

var ItemConfiguration = function () {

    var flag1, flag2, flag3, flag4;
   
    function ItemConfiguration() {

    }

    ItemConfiguration.prototype = function () {
        getItemsConfiguration: function(flag1, flag2, flag3, flag4) {
            this.flag1 = flag1;
            this.flag2 = flag2;
            this.flag3 = flag3;
            this.flag4 = flag4;
           
            var itemsStatus = new Object();
            itemsStatus[ItemTypes.Item1] = _getStatusForItem1();
            itemsStatus[ItemTypes.Item2] = _getStatusForItem2();
            itemsStatus[ItemTypes.Item3] = _getStatusForItem3();

            return itemsStatus;
        },

        _getStatusForItem1:function() {
            if (this.flag1 && this.flag2) {
                return ItemStatus.Status1;
            } else if (this.flag3 || this.flag4) {
                return ItemStatus.Status2;
            }

            _noStatusHandler();
        },

        _getStatusForItem2:function() {
            if (this.flag3 || this.flag2) {
                return ItemStatus.Status3;
            } else if (this.flag1 || this.flag2) {
                return ItemStatus.Status1;
            }

            _noStatusHandler();
        },

        _getStatusForItem3:function() {
            if (this.flag3 || this.flag1 && this.flag3) {
                return ItemStatus.Status1;
            } else if (this.flag2 && this.flag4) {
                return ItemStatus.Status3;
            }

            _noStatusHandler();
        },

        _noStatusHandler:function() {
            throw {
                message: "No flags matching for " + itemType + "with the flags combination"
                + "flag1: " + flag1 + ", "
                + "flag2: " + flag2 + ", "
                + "flag3: " + flag3 + ", "
                + "flag4: " + flag4 + ", "
            };
        }
    };

    return ItemConfiguration;
} ();

It seems that the code looks cleaner in this way and is easier to read. For the private method, I would let the user to specify all the parameters because is more clear for him and he don’t need to create a new object to send the parameters and use it only in one place.
One thing that came to my mind is to create an object or a dictionary that contains the private functions for each item type. But it would be to complex and I don’t know if is worth it.
What do you think? Do you see another way to implement it?

Last edit: Another option is to create a mapping based on the flags (for example each combinations of flag has a unique key that point to an object that has our item types configuration –ex: flag1*2^0+flag2*2^1+flag3*2^3 in base 10 or we could use a mapping in base 2). What is my concern for this solution is the complexity of the code increase, even if the numbers of line are less and we don’t have the IF statements anymore.