Usually a question like this indicates an X/Y problem: You need to do X, you think Y will help you do that, so you try to do Y, can't, and ask how to do Y. It would frequently be more useful to ask how to do X instead.
But answering the question asked: You could use replacer and reviver functions to convert the function to a string (during stringify) and back into a function (during parse) to store a string version of the function, but there are all sorts of issues with doing that, not least that the scope in which the function is defined may well matter to the function. (It doesn't matter to the function you've shown in the question, but I assume that's not really representative.) And converting a string from local storage into code you may run means that you are trusting that the local storage content hasn't been corrupted in a malicious way. Granted it's not likely unless the page is already vulnerable to XSS attacks, but it's an issue to keep in mind.
Here's an example, but I don't recommend it unless other options have been exhausted, not least because it uses eval, which (like its close cousin new Function)) can be a vector for malicious code:
// The object
var obj = {
a: 5,
b: function (param) {
return param;
}
};
// Convert to JSON using a replacer function to output
// the string version of a function with /Function(
// in front and )/ at the end.
var json = JSON.stringify(obj, function(key, value) {
if (typeof value === "function") {
return "/Function(" + value.toString() + ")/";
}
return value;
});
// Convert to an object using a reviver function that
// recognizes the /Function(...)/ value and converts it
// into a function via -shudder- `eval`.
var obj2 = JSON.parse(json, function(key, value) {
if (typeof value === "string" &&
value.startsWith("/Function(") &&
value.endsWith(")/")) {
value = value.substring(10, value.length - 2);
return (0, eval)("(" + value + ")");
}
return value;
});
document.body.innerHTML = obj2.b(42);
The construct (0, eval)("(" + value + ")"); ensures that eval runs at global scope rather than within the scope of the reviver function. Normally eval has a magic ability to use the scope you call it in, but that only works when you call it directly. Indirect eval as shown (or just var e = eval; e("(" + value + ")");) doesn't have that magic ability, it runs at global scope.
I've taken to storing the function name, along with the parameter values, in an array, with the first item in the array being the function name prepended with a $, to separate them from normal arrays.
In the above example I have Sass and JS functions to retrieve color values from a global map/object. Parsing the function in this manner naturally requires custom code, but in terms of "storing" functions in JSON, I like this way of doing it.
For someone that still need include, for whatever reason, the function definition in JSON, this code can help (but can be slow depending object size):
function Object2JsonWithFunctions(o, space = null) {
var functionList = {}
var fnSeq = 0;
var snrepl = function(k,v){
if(typeof v === 'function'){
fnSeq++;
var funcName = `___fun${fnSeq}___`;
var funcText = ''+v;
functionList[funcName] = funcText
return funcName;
}
return v;
}
var RawJson = JSON.stringify(o, snrepl, space);
for(func in functionList){
var PropValue = `"${func}"`;
RawJson = RawJson.replace(PropValue, functionList[func])
}
return RawJson;}
The code will do the normal convert to JSON.
For functions, the original stringify will return as "prop":"function()..." (function as a string)... The code above will create a placeholder (e.g: "prop":"fn1") and create a function list... After, will replace every placeholder to original function body...