How can I unset a JavaScript variable?
Asked Answered
T

13

689

I have a global variable in JavaScript (actually a window property, but I don't think it matters) which was already populated by a previous script, but I don't want another script that will run later to see its value or that it was even defined.

I've put some_var = undefined and it works for the purpose of testing typeof some_var == "undefined" but I really do not think it's the right way to go about it.

What do you think?

Tribble answered 20/10, 2009 at 19:23 Comment(0)
E
551

The delete operator removes a property from an object. It cannot remove a variable. So the answer to the question depends on how the global variable or property is defined.

(1) If it is created with var, it cannot be deleted.

For example:

var g_a = 1; //create with var, g_a is a variable
delete g_a; //return false
console.log(g_a); //g_a is still 1

(2) If it is created without var, it can be deleted.

g_b = 1; //create without var, g_b is a property
delete g_b; //return true
console.log(g_b); //error, g_b is not defined

Technical Explanation

1. Using var

In this case the reference g_a is created in what the ECMAScript spec calls "VariableEnvironment" that is attached to the current scope - this may be the a function execution context in the case of using var inside a function (though it may be get a little more complicated when you consider let) or in the case of "global" code the VariableEnvironment is attached to the global object (often window).

References in the VariableEnvironment are not normally deletable - the process detailed in ECMAScript 10.5 explains this in detail, but suffice it to say that unless your code is executed in an eval context (which most browser-based development consoles use), then variables declared with var cannot be deleted.

2. Without Using var

When trying to assign a value to a name without using the var keyword, JavaScript tries to locate the named reference in what the ECMAScript spec calls "LexicalEnvironment", and the main difference is that LexicalEnvironments are nested - that is a LexicalEnvironment has a parent (what the ECMAScript spec calls "outer environment reference") and when JavaScript fails to locate the reference in a LexicalEnvironment, it looks in the parent LexicalEnvironment (as detailed in 10.3.1 and 10.2.2.1). The top level LexicalEnvironment is the "global environment", and that is bound to the global object in that its references are the global object's properties. So if you try to access a name that was not declared using a var keyword in the current scope or any outer scopes, JavaScript will eventually fetch a property of the window object to serve as that reference. As we've learned before, properties on objects can be deleted.

Notes

  1. It is important to remember that var declarations are "hoisted" - i.e. they are always considered to have happened in the beginning of the scope that they are in - though not the value initialization that may be done in a var statement - that is left where it is. So in the following code, a is a reference from the VariableEnvironment and not the window property and its value will be 10 at the end of the code:

    function test() { a = 5; var a = 10; }
    
  2. The above discussion is when "strict mode" is not enabled. Lookup rules are a bit different when using "strict mode" and lexical references that would have resolved to window properties without "strict mode" will raise "undeclared variable" errors under "strict mode". I didn't really understand where this is specified, but its how browsers behave.

Enhance answered 18/9, 2014 at 18:33 Comment(19)
What you said is a common misconception but is actually incorrect - in Javascript there are no "global variables". Variables defined without an explicit scope (such as using var outside a function) are properties of the "global object", which in web browsers is window. So - var a = 1; delete window.a; console.log(a); will successfully delete the variable and cause the last line to issue a reference error.Tribble
@Guss, your code var a = 1; delete window.a; console.log(a); displays 1.Enhance
Which browser are you using?Tribble
I am using Google Chrome v36. I tested on other browsers. It looks like it isn't consistent cross browsers. Chrome and Opera displayed 1, while Firefox, Safari and IE 11 on my computer gave an error.Enhance
ECMA-262 v5.1 has this to say: "Every execution context has an associated VariableEnvironment. Variables and functions declared in ECMAScript code evaluated in an execution context are added as bindings in that VariableEnvironment’s Environment Record"; and also: "The global environment’s Environment Record is an object environment record whose binding object is the global object." So if after running my code example above, window.a == 1 then the browser is in violation of ECMA-262.Tribble
From what I can see, in Chrome window is magical and you cannot delete even its user defined properties, which would explain the behavior you described, but doesn't excuse this violation of the standard.Tribble
Maybe it is because browsers adapt to the standard gradually. I do not have old versions of Firefox, Safari or IE to verify. But I guess there were some old versions that would have window.a == 1.Enhance
Ok, my mistake. See ecma-international.org/ecma-262/5.1/#sec-10.5 (sub-points 2 and 8.c.ii): When running my test in the developer console, it is generally considered "eval context" (though maybe not in Chrome), so it will raise an error. The same code in a real document's global context will output 1 correctly in all browsers. Running in real documents, your code examples are correct. I selected your answer as correct, but I'd appreciate it if you can edit it to include explaining window.a = 1; delete window.a; and possibly the mechanism. I can do so as well if you don't mind.Tribble
@Enhance What happens with scoped variables? Aren't they deleted automatically by the browser?Menon
@KlaiderKlai yes. Function scoped variables are created and destroyed every time when the function is executed. Probably closure is an exception.Enhance
No chance for classesMamey
Chrome: var a = 1; delete window.a; console.log(a); displays 1 and then undefined because 1 is for the first var a=1 and then undefined is for console.logDavenport
What's the harm in simply setting it back to undefined?Cathe
The prescriptive answer is to use an object with a propery - e.g., obj.a=1 - then delete that property - delete obj.a - then reference it - obj.a. Not using use strict is just for legacy code. Writing code that behaves differently under strict and not strict is dangerous. Javascript is full of rabbit holes - avoid clever and stick to obvious clear practices so everyone can go home early.Serbocroatian
Is there any difference between the behavior of var and let in this case?Oswaldooswalt
@Serge No, both, 1 and undefined are “for” console.log(). 1 is the console output generated and undefined is the return value of console.log(), which always returns undefined.—You can test this with 5; console.log('6');.Knowledgeable
@Cathe Setting the variable to undefined doesn't technically "undefine" the variable. Presumably the OP wanted the variable to be completely erased from existence, and simply setting it to undefined doesn't do this.Foolscap
@Oswaldooswalt this answer takes advantage of the "horror of implicit globals". Using only = to define a variable will implicitly define a property on globalThis (window). That way the delete keyword is applicable.Foolscap
This answer is outdated and this use of delete is deprecated. When using strict mode, this will throw an error. The correct way its to simply set the the variable to null. (More info here, and this answer.)Boehmenism
L
295

scunliffe's answer will work, but technically it ought to be

delete window.some_var;

delete is supposed to be a no-op when the target isn't an object property. e.g.,

(function() {
   var foo = 123;
   delete foo; // wont do anything, foo is still 123
   var bar = { foo: 123 };
   delete bar.foo; // foo is gone
}());

But since global variables are actually members of the window object, it works.

When prototype chains are involved, using delete gets more complex because it only removes the property from the target object, and not the prototype. e.g.,

function Foo() {}
Foo.prototype = { bar: 123 };
var foo = new Foo();
// foo.bar is 123
foo.bar = 456;
// foo.bar is now 456
delete foo.bar;
// foo.bar is 123 again.

So be careful.

Note: My answer is somewhat inaccurate (see "Misconceptions" at the end). The link explains all the gory details, but the summary is that there can be big differences between browsers and depending on the object you are deleting from. delete object.someProp should generally be safe as long as object !== window. I still wouldn't use it to delete variables declared with var although you can under the right circumstances.

Litt answered 20/10, 2009 at 19:47 Comment(6)
thanks @jedierikb for the link to that interesting article. more specifically to this part <perfectionkills.com/understanding-delete/#misconceptions> of that article where the author states that noah's statement "delete is supposed to be a no-op" is rather inaccurate along with an excellent exlpanation why it is inaccurate. (Don't shoot the messenger!)Carrageen
In regard to the last sentence of the revised answer, the only circumstance in which you can delete variables declared with var is when the variable was declared with eval.Oust
In this case, the delete statement doesn't appear to do anything at all. What's going on here?Leavening
@AndersonGreen—decalred global variables are created with DontDelete flag so not deletable. That code behaves exactly as expected.Marxismleninism
This answer is outdated and this use of delete is deprecated. (See here, and this answer.)Boehmenism
I think there's different answers here depending on what you are trying to do. Yes, in modern strict mode JS if you set an unqualified variable to null, it can be garbage collected. However if you want to remove the reference completely, delete is the way to go. As noah noted, you'd always want to use the fully qualified delete window.propToRemove if it was unqualified.Gel
N
42

If you are implicitly declaring the variable without var, the proper way would be to use delete foo.

However after you delete it, if you try to use this in an operation such as addition a ReferenceError will be thrown because you can't add a string to an undeclared, undefined identifier. Example:

x = 5;
delete x
alert('foo' + x )
// ReferenceError: x is not defined

It may be safer in some situations to assign it to false, null, or undefined so it's declared and won't throw this type of error.

foo = false

Note that in ECMAScript null, false, undefined, 0, NaN, or '' would all evaluate to false. Just make sure you dont use the !== operator but instead != when type checking for booleans and you don't want identity checking (so null would == false and false == undefined).

Also note that delete doesn't "delete" references but just properties directly on the object, e.g.:

bah = {}, foo = {}; bah.ref = foo;

delete bah.ref;
alert( [bah.ref, foo ] )
// ,[object Object] (it deleted the property but not the reference to the other object)

If you have declared a variable with var you can't delete it:

(function() {
    var x = 5;
    alert(delete x)
    // false
})();

In Rhino:

js> var x
js> delete x
false

Nor can you delete some predefined properties like Math.PI:

js> delete Math.PI
false

There are some odd exceptions to delete as with any language, if you care enough you should read:

Nozicka answered 20/10, 2009 at 19:31 Comment(1)
Thanks for the complete answer with all the details. I marked it up for this, but I've accepted Noah's answer because I believe that for a simple question brevity is more important then completion. Again - thanks for the great work you did on this answer.Tribble
G
38

See noah's answer for full details

//Option A.) set to null
some_var = null;

//Option B.) set to undefined
some_var = undefined;

//Option C.) remove/delete the variable reference
delete obj.some_var
//if your variable was defined as a global, you'll need to
//qualify the reference with 'window'
delete window.some_var;

References:

Gel answered 20/10, 2009 at 19:24 Comment(8)
This doesn't work if the scope of this code is a function. See @noah's answer for the correct solution.Doyenne
Thanks for the answer, but I've accepted Noah's answer because it better explains the pitfalls of delete.Tribble
no worries... I gave a "quick n dirty" simple answer - @Litt added all the details for the "other" cases thus he deserves credit too. ;-)Gel
This is not correct. delete only works for a property. Setting it null the variable still exists.Singapore
This answer is good enough for the most likely case where you check with "if (some_var) { .. }"Fasciate
In java/js if you make some_var = null garbage collector will free memory for this varAirmail
note that perfectionkills.com/understanding-delete/#misconceptions claims it's incorrectImpolicy
This use of delete is deprecated. (See here and also this answer.)Boehmenism
H
21

TLDR: simple defined variables (without var, let, const) could be deleted with delete. If you use var, let, const - they could not be deleted neither with delete nor with Reflect.deleteProperty.

Chrome 55:

simpleVar = "1";
"1"
delete simpleVar;
true
simpleVar;
VM439:1 Uncaught ReferenceError: simpleVar is not defined
    at <anonymous>:1:1
(anonymous) @ VM439:1
var varVar = "1";
undefined
delete varVar;
false
varVar;
"1"
let letVar = "1";
undefined
delete letVar;
true
letVar;
"1"
const constVar="1";
undefined
delete constVar;
true
constVar;
"1"
Reflect.deleteProperty (window, "constVar");
true
constVar;
"1"
Reflect.deleteProperty (window, "varVar");
false
varVar;
"1"
Reflect.deleteProperty (window, "letVar");
true
letVar;
"1"

Firefox Nightly 53.0a1 shows the same behaviour.

Hyacinthhyacintha answered 5/1, 2017 at 15:13 Comment(2)
Your answer is technically correct, so you get a point, but everything you wrote is covered by the selected answer with much more details and references to the ECMAScript specs - in the future it would be useful to review existing answer before posting.Tribble
Agreed. But there mentioned only var case. As for me it was interesting to test and share let and const cases as well. However, thanks for note. Will try to be more specific next time.Hyacinthhyacintha
B
10

⚠️ The accepted answer (and others) are outdated!

TL;DR

  • delete does not remove variables.
    (It's only for removing a property from an object.)

  • The correct way to "unset" is to simply set the variable to null. (source)
    (This enables JavaScript's automatic processes to remove the variable from memory.)

Example:

x = null;

😉


More info:

Use of the delete operator on a variable is deprecated since 2012, when all browsers implemented (automatic) mark-and-sweep garbage-collection. The process works by automatically determining when objects/variables become "unreachable" (deciding whether or not the code still requires them).

With JavaScript, in all modern browsers:

  • Garbage collection is performed automatically. We cannot force or prevent it.
  • Objects are retained in memory while they are reachable.
  • Being referenced is not the same as being reachable: a pack of interlinked objects can become unreachable as a whole. (source)

The delete operator is only used to remove a property from an object; it does not remove variables.

Unlike what common belief suggests (perhaps due to other programming languages like delete in C++), the delete operator has nothing to do with directly freeing memory. Memory management is done indirectly via breaking references. (source)

When using strict mode ('use strict';, as opposed to regular/"sloppy mode") an attempt to delete a variable will throw an error and is not allowed. Normal variables in JavaScript can't be deleted using the delete operator (source) (or any other way, as of 2021).

 


 

...alas, the only solution:

Freeing the contents of a variable

To free the contents of a variable, you can simply set it to null:

var x;

// ...

x = null;    // (x can now be garbage collected)

(source)


Further Reading:

Boehmenism answered 2/2, 2021 at 0:9 Comment(4)
Umm... Actually, null is a valid value - if setting a variable to null results in it disappearing (i.e. causing future references to throw ReferenceError: x is not defined), then a lot of software would break. If you would have said to set it to undefined, we might have had something to discuss.Tribble
Additionally, the original question was about a "global variable", which - as the the accepted answer correctly describes - is either a scoped variable, in which case it cannot be deleted (no, setting it to null does not delete it), or it is a property on the global object, in which case delete will remove it just fine.Tribble
After reading everything again, I think the issue I have with your answer is that it is mostly about how a Javascript VM manages memory and it deals (probably pretty well) with how one might want to free memory consumed by a value stored in Javascript. Unfortunately the OP isn't about memory management per-se, but is more about causing other Javascript code to not see that a variable (actually a global object property) has been defined. It is less about actual memory use and more about object metadata.Tribble
your answer would make sense if you would set it to undefined. If you set it to null it keeps value in memory in JSTrolly
M
7

ECMAScript 2015 offers Reflect API. It is possible to delete an object property with Reflect.deleteProperty():

Reflect.deleteProperty(myObject, 'myProp');
// it is equivalent to:
delete myObject.myProp;
delete myObject['myProp'];

To delete a property of the global window object:

Reflect.deleteProperty(window, 'some_var');

In some cases properties cannot be deleted (when the property is not configurable) and then this function returns false (as well as the delete operator). In other cases it returns true:

Object.defineProperty(window, 'some_var', {
    configurable: false,
    writable: true,
    enumerable: true,
    value: 'some_val'
});

var frozen = Object.freeze({ myProperty: 'myValue' });
var regular = { myProperty: 'myValue' };
var blank = {};

console.log(Reflect.deleteProperty(window, 'some_var')); // false
console.log(window.some_var); // some_var

console.log(Reflect.deleteProperty(frozen, 'myProperty')); // false
console.log(frozen.myProperty); // myValue

console.log(Reflect.deleteProperty(regular, 'myProperty')); // true
console.log(regular.myProperty); // undefined

console.log(Reflect.deleteProperty(blank, 'notExistingProperty')); // true
console.log(blank.notExistingProperty); // undefined

There is a difference between deleteProperty function and delete operator when run in strict mode:

'use strict'

var frozen = Object.freeze({ myProperty: 'myValue' });

Reflect.deleteProperty(frozen, 'myProperty'); // false
delete frozen.myProperty;
// TypeError: property "myProperty" is non-configurable and can't be deleted
Musselman answered 25/1, 2016 at 15:37 Comment(0)
O
4

Note that delete returns true when it was successful.

Update 2021: tested on Chrome 88 and Firefox 84:

implicit_global = 1;
delete implicit_global; // true

window.explicit_global = 1;
delete explicit_global; // true

const _object = {property: 1};
delete _object.property; // true

function_set = function() {};
delete function_set; // true

function function_declaration() {};
delete function_declaration; // false

(function () {
    var _var = 1;
    console.log(delete _var); // false
    console.log(_var); // 1
})()

(function () {
    let _let = 1;
    console.log(delete _let); // false
    console.log(_let); // 1
})()

(function () {
    const _const = 1;
    console.log(delete _const); // false
    console.log(_const); // 1
})()

The previous edit of this answer is no longer relevant due to browser updates.

Oysterman answered 23/11, 2015 at 10:36 Comment(5)
It's not always correct. Especially in Chrome. Firefox returns everything correctly. Didn't test in any other browsers. As for let vars and const vars it is returning true what should means that variable deleted but it is not. You could check it in both in Chrome and FF. FF seems returning correct values while Chrome is not. So don't sure you could really rely on it. Let see: let letVar = "1"; undefined delete letVar; true letVar "1" typeof letVar; "string" const constVar="1"; undefined delete constVar; true constVar; "1" typeof constVar; "string"Hyacinthhyacintha
As jedierikb mentioned below there is perfect article by kangax perfectionkills.com/understanding-delete that mostly describes why and how delete operator works. But it is not describing why literally oposite situation with functions. As a pity. However, regarding variables things start appearing to be much more clear.Hyacinthhyacintha
original answer was tested in 2015 on Chrome 52. the behavior is different now on Chrome 88 so i updated the answer. also tested on Firefox 84 - behavior is identical to Chrome 88.Oysterman
What is "The original answer"? Your own answer? Dayong's answer? Or some other answer?Judijudicable
@PeterMortensen good point, i edited the question to be clearer.Oysterman
A
3

Variables, in contrast to simple properties, have the attribute [[Configurable]], meaning impossibility to remove a variable via the delete operator.

However, there is one execution context in which this rule does not affect. It is the eval context: there the [[Configurable]] attribute is not set for variables.

Ameliaamelie answered 25/1, 2017 at 4:46 Comment(0)
B
1

The delete operator removes a property from an object.

delete object.property
delete object['property']

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Operators/delete

According to the question you need one of followings

delete some_var;
delete window.some_var;
delete window['some_var'];
Brassy answered 14/12, 2015 at 21:11 Comment(1)
The part about what delete actually does is correct but the proposed solution is not the correct method. (See here and also this answer.)Boehmenism
Z
1

You cannot delete a variable if you declared it (with var x;) at the time of first use. However, if your variable x first appeared in the script without a declaration, then you can use the delete operator (delete x;) and your variable will be deleted, very similar to deleting an element of an array or deleting a property of an object.

Zosi answered 31/3, 2016 at 17:48 Comment(1)
I think the important distinction here (which I missed when I first asked the question) is that a non "declared" variable, isn't a variable - it is an object property. delete is used to make objects forget about properties being defined, it does not affect variables.Tribble
I
1

I am bit confused. If all you want is for a variables value to not pass to another script then there isn't any need to delete the variable from the scope.

Simply nullify the variable and then explicit check if it is or is not null. Why go through the trouble of deleting the variable from the scope? What purpose does this serve that nullifying can not?

foo = null;
if(foo === null) or if(foo !== null)
Innkeeper answered 13/4, 2019 at 4:59 Comment(8)
The requirement is that the order script, that is not under my control, will not see that the variable exist - specifically for the OP case, the target script has a behavior for the null value that I don't want to trigger.Tribble
No "backend" was abused during the production of this question. These are just a couple of scripts on a website where I have no control of anything except this one script.Tribble
Are both scripts in the same document or in separate documents that one calls the other to load? You mentioned order script and target script. If it is a matter of a variable being passed to another script via a get/post variable, then I would delete it on the backend before any javascript get their hands on it. An example of this in php would be something like. <?php if(isset($_POST['somevariable']) unset($_POST['somevariable']); if(isset($_GET['somevariable']) unset($_GET['somevariable']); ?>Innkeeper
I see. Well if there is checks and balances for null then setting it to a value the target script will do nothing with seems more logical then deleting a variable from scope, but you look to have your answer, so I'll let the horse lay. Thanks for your responses.Innkeeper
One quick question. Will there ever be a script that gets called after yours that will not be in your control but will still need this variable? If so, then deleting the variable from scope is a bad idea.Innkeeper
This question is answered in the original post.Tribble
Doesn't "undefining" a variable speed up the program in a sense? Especially if the variable contains something like a data URI for a pdf.Foolscap
@expressjs123 - except for memory pressure, not at all. If the value is very large, then setting it to any small value would ease memory pressure (undefined is good because it is the default resolution of any undefined property, but any small value would do, such as 0 or ""). That being said, unless you are talking GBs sized value, it is unlikely to have any discernible effect.Tribble
M
0
configurable--> deletable
var a=1
Object.getOwnPropertyDescriptor(window,"a")
return
{value: 1, writable: true, enumerable: true, configurable: false}
b=1
Object.getOwnPropertyDescriptor(window,"b")
return
{value: 1, writable: true, enumerable: true, configurable: true}
a=null or a=undefined not working for delete variable 
return same only changing saved data
{value: null, writable: true, enumerable: true, configurable: false}
Meshuga answered 4/12, 2023 at 12:5 Comment(0)

© 2022 - 2024 — McMap. All rights reserved.