权宜之计
你可以创建一个async init(){…返回this;}方法，然后执行new MyClass().init()，当你通常只说new MyClass()时。
这并不干净，因为它依赖于使用您的代码的每个人，以及您自己，总是像这样实例化对象。但是，如果您只在代码中的一两个特定位置使用该对象，则可能没有问题。
但是一个重要的问题出现了，因为ES没有类型系统，所以如果你忘记调用它，你只是返回了undefined，因为构造函数没有返回任何东西。哦。更好的做法是这样做:
最好的办法是:
class AsyncOnlyObject {
constructor() {
}
async init() {
this.someField = await this.calculateStuff();
}
async calculateStuff() {
return 5;
}
}
async function newAsync_AsyncOnlyObject() {
return await new AsyncOnlyObject().init();
}
newAsync_AsyncOnlyObject().then(console.log);
// output: AsyncOnlyObject {someField: 5}
工厂方法解决方案(稍好)
然而，你可能会意外地做新的AsyncOnlyObject，你应该直接创建使用Object.create(AsyncOnlyObject.prototype)的工厂函数:
async function newAsync_AsyncOnlyObject() {
return await Object.create(AsyncOnlyObject.prototype).init();
}
newAsync_AsyncOnlyObject().then(console.log);
// output: AsyncOnlyObject {someField: 5}
However say you want to use this pattern on many objects... you could abstract this as a decorator or something you (verbosely, ugh) call after defining like postProcess_makeAsyncInit(AsyncOnlyObject), but here I'm going to use extends because it sort of fits into subclass semantics (subclasses are parent class + extra, in that they should obey the design contract of the parent class, and may do additional things; an async subclass would be strange if the parent wasn't also async, because it could not be initialized the same way):
抽象解决方案(扩展/子类版本)
class AsyncObject {
constructor() {
throw new Error('classes descended from AsyncObject must be initialized as (await) TheClassName.anew(), rather than new TheClassName()');
}
static async anew(...args) {
var R = Object.create(this.prototype);
R.init(...args);
return R;
}
}
class MyObject extends AsyncObject {
async init(x, y=5) {
this.x = x;
this.y = y;
// bonus: we need not return 'this'
}
}
MyObject.anew('x').then(console.log);
// output: MyObject {x: "x", y: 5}
(不要在生产中使用:我没有考虑过复杂的场景，比如这是否是为关键字参数编写包装器的正确方式。)
