Why can I change a constant object in javascript

Question

I know that ES6 is not standardized yet, but a lot of browsers currently support const keyword in JS.

In spec, it is written that:

The value of a constant cannot change through re-assignment, and a constant cannot be re-declared. Because of this, although it is possible to declare a constant without initializing it, it would be useless to do so.

and when I do something like this:

const xxx = 6;
xxx = 999;
xxx++;
const yyy = [];
yyy = 'string';
yyy = [15, 'a'];

I see that everything is ok xxx is still 6 and yyy is [].

But if I do yyy.push(6); yyy.push(1);, my constant array has been changed. Right now it is [6, 1] and by the way I still can not change it with yyy = 1;.

I this a bug, or am I missing something? I tried it in the latest chrome and FF29

Solution 1

The documentation states:

...constant cannot change through re-assignment
...constant cannot be re-declared

When you're adding to an array or object you're not re-assigning or re-declaring the constant, it's already declared and assigned, you're just adding to the "list" that the constant points to.

So this works fine:

const x = {};

x.foo = 'bar';

console.log(x); // {foo : 'bar'}

x.foo = 'bar2';

console.log(x); // {foo : 'bar2'}  

and this:

const y = [];

y.push('foo');

console.log(y); // ['foo']

y.unshift("foo2");

console.log(y); // ['foo2', 'foo']

y.pop();

console.log(y); // ['foo2']

but neither of these:

const x = {};
x = {foo: 'bar'}; // error - re-assigning

const y = ['foo'];
const y = ['bar']; // error - re-declaring

const foo = 'bar'; 
foo = 'bar2';       // error - can not re-assign
var foo = 'bar3';   // error - already declared
function foo() {};  // error - already declared

Solution 2

This happens because your constant is actually storing a reference to the array. When you join something into your array you are not modifying your constant value, but the array it points to. The same would happen if you assigned an object to a constant and tried to modify any property of it.

If you want to freeze an array or object so it can't be modified, you can use the Object.freeze method, which is already part of ECMAScript 5.

const x = Object.freeze(['a'])
x.push('b')
console.log(x) // ["a"]

Solution 3

Came through this article while searching on why I was able to update an Object even after defining it as const. So the point here is that it is not the Object directly but the attributes it contains which can be updated.

For example, my Object looks like:

const number = {
    id:5,
    name:'Bob'
};

The above answers correctly pointed out that it's the Object which is const and not its attribute. Hence, I will be able to update the id or name by doing:

number.name = 'John';

But, I will not be able to update the Object itself like:

number = {
    id:5,
    name:'John'
  };

TypeError: Assignment to constant variable.

Solution 4

This is consistent behavior with every programming language I can think of.

Consider C - arrays are just glorified pointers. A constant array only means that the value of the pointer will not change - but in fact the data contained at that address is free to.

In javascript, you are allowed to call methods of constant objects (of course - otherwise constant objects would not serve much purpose!) These methods might have the side effect of modifying the object. Since arrays in javascript are objects, this behavior applies to them as well.

All you are assured of is that the constant will always point to the same object. The properties of the object itself are free to change.

Solution 5

The keyword const is a little misleading.

It does not define a constant value. It defines a constant reference to a value.

Because of this you can NOT:

• Reassign a constant value
• Reassign a constant array
• Reassign a constant object

But you CAN:

• Change a constant array
• Change a constant object

View more solutions

Comments

[Andrew]

Can you just create a class, declare the variable and assign its value inside the class. Then, create a GETTER for that variable; and do not implement a setter. It should implement a constant...

[Salvador Dali]

@Andrew thanks, but I am not asking how can I do this. I am curious why const keyword behaves this way.

[Salvador Dali]

so you mean that this is not a bug, but it should work this way? Because I thought that idea of the constant is that it can not be changed. Basically a programmer has trust that no matter what will happen, nothing can change the value inside of my constant.

[veritas]

I think it's not so easy, in this case the value of the constant is an array of specific elements. Changing anything means that you change the value.

[adeneo]

Yes, it's supposed to work this way, you're not re-assigning the constant, it's still the same reference, you're just adding to the array the constant references, and arrays and objects are like "lists", modifying them does not change the reference or re-declare the constant.

[Matt Burland]

@SalvadorDali: constant and read-only are two different things. Your variable is constant, but the array it's pointing to isn't read-only

[Ashith]

By that same logic, a constant five set to 5 doesn't actually have a value of 5, it is just a reference to the number 5. So if I do five++ I'm not changing the constant, just the number it points to.

[Guilherme Sehn]

@Anthony the reference thing only works for arrays and objects, not primitive values

[sidgeon smythe]

@Anthony In your example, you're changing the number that the variable five points to (the variable five used to be a label for the number 5, now it's pointing to a different number: 6). In the example in the question (and this answer), x always points to the same list; if x is const you cannot make it point to a different list. The only difference is that the same list can grow or shrink; this is something only possible for arrays and objects and not for primitives.

[Ebrahim]

your example is a practical one and correct descriptions

[user1063287]

here is another beginner-friendly explanation of how primitive types and objects are saved in memory and their subsequently different behaviour (from 2017 so slightly dated, but a pretty good introduction to the topic): youtube.com/watch?v=9ooYYRLdg_g

[Programmer Dancuk]

thank you on this. It clarifies how const works in JS that damn cumbersome compared to other langs especially statically typed language.

[user137369]

Swift is an example of a language which does not work like this. let someArray = ["one"]; someArray.append("two") fails to compile with error: cannot use mutating member on immutable value: 'someArray' is a 'let' constant and note: change 'let' to 'var' to make it mutable.

[Teekin]

Explaining why I'm downvoting. There's an obvious reason why this is being asked; because it's contrary to what programmers are used to. Constants in C/C++ are typically defined by an immutable macro, in PHP by a specific define() function. When programmers say "constant", they typically mean "something that will not change", nevermind the mathetmatics under the hood. That's why ONLY IN JAVASCRIPT people are consistently confused by this bizarre choice of keyword use; because it's a bad one. The answer here isn't technically incorrect per se, it's just also not very useful.

[Teekin]

Upvoting for pointing out that the keyword is misleading. It is.

[Nick Rolando]

So basically the variable is a pointer, and as const you cannot change the memory address it is referencing or pointing to, but you're free to change the value that memory address is holding?