Os nossos voluntários ainda não traduziram este artigo para Português (Europeu). Junte-se a nós e ajude-nos a fazer o trabalho!
Pode também ler o artigo em English (US).

The let statement declares a block scope local variable, optionally initializing it to a value.


let var1 [= value1] [, var2 [= value2]] [, ..., varN [= v];


var1, var2, …, varN
Variable name. It can be any legal identifier.
value1, value2, …, valueN
Initial value of the variable. It can be any legal expression.


let allows you to declare variables that are limited in scope to the block, statement, or expression on which it is used. This is unlike the var keyword, which defines a variable globally, or locally to an entire function regardless of block scope.

An explanation of why the name "let" was chosen can be found here.

Scoping rules

Variables declared by let have their scope in the block for which they are defined, as well as in any contained sub-blocks. In this way, let works very much like var. The main difference is that the scope of a var variable is the entire enclosing function:

function varTest() {
  var x = 1;
  if (true) {
    var x = 2;  // same variable!
    console.log(x);  // 2
  console.log(x);  // 2

function letTest() {
  let x = 1;
  if (true) {
    let x = 2;  // different variable
    console.log(x);  // 2
  console.log(x);  // 1

At the top level of programs and functions, let, unlike var, does not create a property on the global object. For example:

var x = 'global';
let y = 'global';
console.log(this.x); // "global"
console.log(this.y); // undefined

Emulating private members

In dealing with constructors it is possible to use the let bindings to share one or more private members without using closures:

var Thing;

  let privateScope = new WeakMap();
  let counter = 0;

  Thing = function() {
    this.someProperty = 'foo';
    privateScope.set(this, {
      hidden: ++counter,

  Thing.prototype.showPublic = function() {
    return this.someProperty;

  Thing.prototype.showPrivate = function() {
    return privateScope.get(this).hidden;

console.log(typeof privateScope);
// "undefined"

var thing = new Thing();

// Thing {someProperty: "foo"}

// "foo"

// 1

The same privacy pattern with closures over local variables can be created with var, but those need a function scope (typically an IIFE in the module pattern) instead of just a block scope like in the example above.


Redeclaring the same variable within the same function or block scope raises a SyntaxError.

if (x) {
  let foo;
  let foo; // SyntaxError thrown.

You may encounter errors in switch statements because there is only one block.

let x = 1;
switch(x) {
  case 0:
    let foo;
  case 1:
    let foo; // SyntaxError for redeclaration.

However, it's important to point out that a block nested inside a case clause will create a new block scoped lexical environment, which will not produce the redeclaration errors shown above.

let x = 1;

switch(x) {
  case 0: {
    let foo;
  case 1: {
    let foo;

Temporal Dead Zone

let bindings are created at the top of the (block) scope containing the declaration, commonly referred to as "hoisting". Unlike variables declared with var, which will start with the value undefined, let variables are not initialized until their definition is evaluated. Accessing the variable before the initialization results in a ReferenceError. The variable is in a "temporal dead zone" from the start of the block until the initialization is processed.

function do_something() {
  console.log(bar); // undefined
  console.log(foo); // ReferenceError
  var bar = 1;
  let foo = 2;

The temporal dead zone and typeof

Unlike with simply undeclared variables and variables that hold a value of undefined, using the typeof operator to check for the type of a variable in that variable's TDZ will throw a ReferenceError:

// prints out 'undefined'
console.log(typeof undeclaredVariable);
// results in a 'ReferenceError'
console.log(typeof i);
let i = 10;

Another example of temporal dead zone combined with lexical scoping

Due to lexical scoping, the identifier "foo" inside the expression (foo + 55) evaluates to the if block's foo, and not the overlying variable foo with the value of 33.
In that very line, the if block's "foo" has already been created in the lexical environment, but has not yet reached (and terminated) its initialization (which is part of the statement itself): it's still in the temporal dead zone.

function test(){
   var foo = 33;
   if (true) {
      let foo = (foo + 55); // ReferenceError

This phenomenon may confuse you in a situation like the following. The instruction let n of n.a is already inside the private scope of the for loop's block, hence the identifier "n.a" is resolved to the property 'a' of the 'n' object located in the first part of the instruction itself ("let n"), which is still in the temporal dead zone since its declaration statement has not been reached and terminated.

function go(n) {
  // n here is defined!
  console.log(n); // Object {a: [1,2,3]}

  for (let n of n.a) { // ReferenceError

go({a: [1, 2, 3]});

Other situations

When used inside a block, let limits the variable's scope to that block. Note the difference between var whose scope is inside the function where it is declared.

var a = 1;
var b = 2;

if (a === 1) {
  var a = 11; // the scope is global
  let b = 22; // the scope is inside the if-block

  console.log(a);  // 11
  console.log(b);  // 22

console.log(a); // 11
console.log(b); // 2


Specification Status Comment
ECMAScript 2015 (6th Edition, ECMA-262)
The definition of 'Let and Const Declarations' in that specification.
Standard Initial definition. Does not specify let expressions or let blocks.
ECMAScript Latest Draft (ECMA-262)
The definition of 'Let and Const Declarations' in that specification.

Browser compatibility

FeatureChromeEdgeFirefoxInternet ExplorerOperaSafari
Basic support


48 — 492 3

41 — 491

12444 5 6111710
FeatureAndroid webviewChrome for AndroidEdge mobileFirefox for AndroidOpera AndroidiOS SafariSamsung Internet
Basic support


41 — 491


48 — 492 3

41 — 491

12444 5 617104.0

1. Strict mode is required.

2. Support outside of strict mode.

3. From version 48 until version 49 (exclusive): this feature is behind the Enable Experimental JavaScript Features preference. To change preferences in Chrome, visit chrome://flags.

4. Prior to Firefox 44, let is only available to code blocks in HTML wrapped in a <script type="application/javascript;version=1.7"> block (or higher version) and has different semantics (e.g. no temporal dead zone).

5. Prior to Firefox 46, a TypeError is thrown on redeclaration instead of a SyntaxError.

6. Firefox 54 adds support of let in workers.

See also