We Keep Coding

Why does my function return an incorrect answer for the average salary question

I am pretty new to javascript and working on problems from leetcode.
The description included is:
"Given an array of unique integers salary where salary[i] is the salary of the employee i.
Return the average salary of employees excluding the minimum and maximum salary."
When I run my code it says that I have the incorrect output when the following array is passed in.
[25000,48000,57000,86000,33000,10000,42000,3000,54000,29000,79000,40000]
Expected Output: 41700.00000
My Output: 41000.00000
I've compared my code to other submissions and as far as I can tell mine should run the same.
Here is my code:
function average(salary) {
var sortedSalary = salary.sort();
var total = sortedSalary.reduce((curr, acc) => {
return curr + acc
}, 0);
var result = (total - sortedSalary[0] - sortedSalary[sortedSalary.length - 1]) / (sortedSalary.length - 2);
return result;
};
console.log(average([25000,48000,57000,86000,33000,10000,42000,3000,54000,29000,79000,40000]));
Thank you for any insight into this.

You're sorting the array alphabetically, not by the smallest number, so you end up removing the wrong numbers.
Use sort((a, b) => a - b) instead:
const salary = [25000,48000,57000,86000,33000,10000,42000,3000,54000,29000,79000,40000]
function average(salary) {
var sortedSalary = salary.sort((a, b) => a - b);
var total = sortedSalary.reduce((curr, acc) => { return curr + acc }, 0);
var result = (total - sortedSalary[0] - sortedSalary[sortedSalary.length - 1]) / (sortedSalary.length - 2);
return result;
};
console.log(average(salary))

const average = salary => salary
.sort((a,b) => a - b) // sort numerically
.filter((_,i,l) => i > 0 && i < l.length - 1) // remove first and last index
.reduce((a,s) => a + s) / (salary.length - 2) // calculate average
console.log(average([25000,48000,57000,86000,33000,10000,42000,3000,54000,29000,79000,40000]))

It does not need to be sorted at all. Apart from that, sorting is O(N Log N) not sufficiently efficient here. You just have to come up with an O(N) algorithm for this problem.
This'll pass:
var average = function(salary) {
if (salary.length < 3) {
return 0
}
let min = salary[0]
let max = salary[0]
let sum = 0
for (let sal of salary) {
if (sal > max) {
max = sal
}
if (sal < min) {
min = sal
}
sum += sal
}
return (sum - max - min) / (salary.length - 2)
};
References
For additional details, you can see the Discussion Board. There are plenty of accepted solutions with a variety of languages and explanations, efficient algorithms, as well as asymptotic time/space complexity analysis1, 2 in there.
For interviews:
We'd like to write bug-free and clean codes based on standards and conventions (e.g., c1, 2, c++1, 2, java1, 2, c#1, 2, python1, javascript1, go1, rust1).
For easy questions, brute force algorithms usually get accepted. For interviews, brute force is less desired, especially if the question would be an easy level, like the one you're solving.

prevent rendering to page of duplicate random number generated when min and max are user defined [duplicate]

I ran into the challenge where I need a function that returns a random number within a given range from 0 - X. Not only that, but I require the number returned to be unique; not duplicating numbers that have already been returned on previous calls to the function.
Optionally, when this is done (e.g. the range has been 'exhausted'), just return a random number within the range.
How would one go about doing this?

This should do it:
function makeRandomRange(x) {
var used = new Array(x),
exhausted = false;
return function getRandom() {
var random = Math.floor(Math.random() * x);
if (exhausted) {
return random;
} else {
for (var i=0; i<x; i++) {
random = (random + 1) % x;
if (random in used)
continue;
used[random] = true;
return random;
}
// no free place found
exhausted = true;
used = null; // free memory
return random;
}
};
}
Usage:
var generate = makeRandomRange(20);
var x1 = generate(),
x2 = generate(),
...
Although it works, it has no good performance when the x-th random is generated - it searches the whole list for a free place. This algorithm, a step-by-step Fisher–Yates shuffle, from the question Unique (non-repeating) random numbers in O(1)?, will perform better:
function makeRandomRange(x) {
var range = new Array(x),
pointer = x;
return function getRandom() {
pointer = (pointer-1+x) % x;
var random = Math.floor(Math.random() * pointer);
var num = (random in range) ? range[random] : random;
range[random] = (pointer in range) ? range[pointer] : pointer;
return range[pointer] = num;
};
}
(Demo at jsfiddle.net)
Extended version which does only generate one "group" of unique numbers:
function makeRandomRange(x) {
var range = new Array(x),
pointer = x;
return function getRandom() {
if (range) {
pointer--;
var random = Math.floor(Math.random() * pointer);
var num = (random in range) ? range[random] : random;
range[random] = (pointer in range) ? range[pointer] : pointer;
range[pointer] = num;
if (pointer <= 0) { // first x numbers had been unique
range = null; // free memory;
}
return num;
} else {
return Math.floor(Math.random() * x);
}
};
}
(Demo)

You got some great programming answer. Here's one with a more theoretical flavor to complete your panorama :-)
Your problem is called "sampling" or "subset sampling" and there are several ways you could do this. Let N be the range you are sampling frame (i.e., N=X+1) and M be the size of your sample (the number of elements you want to pick).
if N is much larger than M, you'll want to use an algorithm such as the one suggested by Bentley and Floyd in his column "Programming Pearls: a sample of brilliance" (temporarily available without ACM's lock screen here), I really recommend this as they explicitly give code and discuss in terms of hash tables, etc.; there a few neat tricks in there
if N is within the same range as M, then you might want to use the Fisher-Yates shuffle but stop after only M steps (instead of N)
if you don't really know then the algorithm on page 647 of Devroye's book on random generation is pretty fast.

I wrote this function. It keeps its own array with a history of generated numbers, preventing initial duplicates, continuing to output a random number if all numbers in the range have been outputted once:
// Generates a unique number from a range
// keeps track of generated numbers in a history array
// if all numbers in the range have been returned once, keep outputting random numbers within the range
var UniqueRandom = { NumHistory: new Array(), generate: function(maxNum) {
var current = Math.round(Math.random()*(maxNum-1));
if (maxNum > 1 && this.NumHistory.length > 0) {
if (this.NumHistory.length != maxNum) {
while($.inArray(current, this.NumHistory) != -1) { current = Math.round(Math.random()*(maxNum-1)); }
this.NumHistory.push(current);
return current;
} else {
//unique numbers done, continue outputting random numbers, or we could reset the history array (NumHistory = [];)
return current;
}
} else {
//first time only
this.NumHistory.push(current);
return current;
}
}
};
Here's a working Fiddle
I hope this is of use to someone!
Edit: as pointed out by Pointy below, it might get slow with a large range (here is a
fiddle, going over a range from 0-1000, which seems to run fine). However; I didn't require a very large range, so perhaps this function is indeed not suited if you look to generate and keep track of an enormous range.

You may try generating the number using the current date and time value which would make it unique. To make it within the range, you may have to use some mathematical function.

Coin Change Algorithm JS

I have been trying to come up with a solution for this algorithm for 3-4 days but nothing seems to work and the available solutions are a bit more advanced for me. It has to be solved with conditionals only so no recursion or dynamic programming.
I need to determine the least amount of coins necessary to give change given the following denominations: 1, 0.5, 0.2, 0.1, 0.05, 0.02 and 0.01.
Input is the following:
Price of an item
Sum paid by customer
Current ideas:
let price = +gets();
let paidSum = +gets();
//gets is used to accept number input
let change = paidSum - price;
I figured I could use Math.floor to isolate the integer part and subtract it but then I have no idea what to do with the remaining sum.
Would modulo work to test whether the remaining sum contains any of the remaining values for change and then subtract again until I reach zero?
I do realize this isn't the best formulated question but I am at a loss here and I've done every other task apart from this. Thanks.

Simpler, reverse and map the denominations in cents and return a new array with the number of coins you need for each denomination.
const coinsCents = [1, 2, 5, 10, 20, 50, 100]
const getChange = (amountInCents) => {
return coinsCents.reverse().map(coin => {
let amountCoin = Math.floor(amountInCents/coin)
amountInCents -= amountCoin * coin
return amountCoin
}).reverse()
}

With the denominations you have specified, the problem is simpler than the general change making problem. In this actual case we can be sure that using the largest denomination, that is not greater than the amount to pay, always leads to an optimal solution.
So then there is no need for recursion or dynamic programming. Just a simple loop will do.
I will here ignore the additional "layer" of getting the price of the bill and the amount that the customer pays. In the end the only thing that counts is the change amount to pay back to the customer. So this snippet asks for that change amount and returns the coins that need to be given as change.
function getChange(amount) {
amount *= 100; // Convert to number of cents
var denominations = [1, 2, 5, 10, 20, 50, 100]; // cents
var result = [];
while (amount > 0) {
var coin = denominations.pop(); // Get next greatest coin
var count = Math.floor(amount/coin); // See how many times I need that coin
amount -= count * coin; // Reduce the amount with that number of coins
if (count) result.push([coin/100, count]); // Store count & coin
}
return result;
}
// I/O management
change.oninput = function () {
var coins = getChange(this.value);
result.textContent = coins.map(([coin, count]) => `${count} x $${coin}`).join(" + ");
};
To be paid to customer: <input id="change">
<div>Coins to pay: <span id="result"></span></div>

var coins;
var coinArray = {};
var output = {};
/* Method to get coin value without decimal point - it is required because
* javascript will consider 5.6 as 6 if we do Math.round()
*/
function getRoundFigureCoinValue(x) {
return (x * 10 - ((x * 10) % 10)) / 10;
}
// Method to calculate possible combination of coins
function calculateCoins(input) {
let largestPossibleCoin = 1;
if (input) {
coins.forEach((x) => {
if (input >= x) {
largestPossibleCoin = x;
}
});
let remainingCents = input % largestPossibleCoin;
output[largestPossibleCoin] = getRoundFigureCoinValue(
(input / largestPossibleCoin).toFixed(1)
);
if (remainingCents && input > 1) {
calculateCoins(remainingCents);
}
return largestPossibleCoin;
}
}
// Method to be called to get output.
function calculatePossibleCoinCombinations(value) {
if (isNaN(value) || +value <= 0) {
console.log('Invalid input');
return;
} else {
console.log('Possible combinations are:')
value = +value;
}
coins = [1, 5, 10, 25];
while (coins.length) {
let largestPossibleCoin = calculateCoins(value) || 0;
let outputString = '';
coins = coins.filter((x) => x < largestPossibleCoin);
Object.keys(output).forEach((key) => {
outputString += `${output[key]} - ${key} cents; `;
})
console.log(outputString);
output = {};
}
}
/*
Sample inputs:
calculatePossibleCoinCombinations('89');
calculatePossibleCoinCombinations(10);
calculatePossibleCoinCombinations(0);
calculatePossibleCoinCombinations('someString');
calculatePossibleCoinCombinations(-10)
*/

Calculate Ratios in JS like Humble Bundle

Do you know the sliders that you have on humblebundle.com when selecting where you want the money to go? Well when you adjust any one ratio it will automatically adjust the rest.
So say you're paying $20 no matter what but you want to adjust your tip to HB from $2 to $5, the ratios that were on the other stuff should automatically lowered to match but I have no idea what I'm doing.
This is as close as I get mathematically:
var settip = 50;
var tip = 5;
var devs = 75;
var donation = 20;
tip = settip;
var newAvail = 100 - tip;
var rCalc = 100 - (devs + donation);
devs = ((devs + rCalc) * newAvail) * .01;
donation = ((donation + rCalc) * newAvail) * .01;
console.log("New Ratio Calculation: " + rCalc);
console.log("New available space: " + newAvail);
console.log(tip);
console.log(devs);
console.log(donation);
The console logs are just so I can try and put it together in my head where things are going wrong. The numbers are also whole numbers first: 50 instead of .5 because Javascript is not accurate and I don't want to do the fix code every time, I'd rather figure out how to make the code work first and then think about optimizing.
So if anyone could guide me on a method or where I am going wrong here, then that'd be great. Thanks.
Tip is tip to the bundle maker.
Devs is tip to the devs.
Donation is tip to the donation box.
Each number is the ratio. Settip is the new ratio, I should be able to change any one value and have it automatically change all others but I can't even figure out how to do the first part so I couldn't begin to try for the second part of making it actually functional.

I think this problem is not as easy as it might seem if you want to cover different edge cases. Here I assume that you distribute money so you need following properties:
Each amount must be whole integer in cents
Sum of all amounts must be equal to the total sum
The simplest way to deal with it in JS is to make all calculations using whole numbers (e.g. sum in cents instead of dollars) and format them in more human-readable way on UI. Still even with this simplification it requires some non-trivial code:
function updateRates(rates, newValue, index) {
var i, len = rates.length;
var sum = 0;
for (i = 0; i < len; i++)
sum += rates[i];
var oldValue = rates[index];
var newRest = sum - newValue;
var curRest = sum - rates[index];
rates[index] = newValue;
var remainders = new Array(len);
var fraction, value, subsum = 0;
for (i = 0; i < len; i++) {
if (i === index) continue;
// special case, all other sliders were at 0 - split value equally
if (curRest === 0) {
fraction = 1.0 / (len - 1)
}
else {
fraction = rates[i] / curRest
}
value = newRest * fraction;
rates[i] = Math.floor(value); // always round down and then distribute rest according to the Largest remainder method
subsum += rates[i];
remainders[i] = {
index: i,
value: value - rates[i]
};
}
// sort remainders and distribute rest (fractions) accordingly
remainders.sort(function (a, b) {
var av = a.value;
var bv = b.value;
if (av === bv)
return 0;
if (av < bv)
return 1;
else
return -1;
});
for (i = 0; subsum < newRest; i++) {
rates[remainders[i].index] += 1;
subsum += 1;
}
return rates;
}
Some non-trivial tests:
1. updateRates([85,10,5], 82, 0) => [82, 12, 6]
2. updateRates([85,10,5], 83, 0) => [83, 11, 6]
3. updateRates([85,10,5], 84, 0) => [84, 11, 5]
4. updateRates([100,0,0], 95, 0) => [95, 2, 3]
5. updateRates([4,3,3,1], 0, 0) => [0, 5, 5, 1]
Pay attention to the example #5. If one used some naive rounding, sum will not be preserved. Effectively you need to distribute +4 in proportion 3:3:1. It means you should add +12/7, +12/7 and +4/7. Since 12/7 = 1 5/7, according to standard mathematical rules all three should be rounded up resulting in +2, +2, +1 but we only got +4 cents to distribute. To fix this issue the largest remainder method is used to distribute fractional cents among categories. Simply speaking the idea is that we first distribute only whole number of cents (i.e. always round down), calculate how many cents are actually left and then distribute them one by one. The biggest possible drawback of this method is that some rates that started with equal values might have different values after update. On the other hand this can't be avoided as example #4 shows: you can't split 5 cents equally between two categories.

To restate what I think you want: the three variables tip, devs and donation should always sum to 100. When one variable is updated, the other two should be updated to compensate. The automatic updates should keep the same ratios to each other (for example, if donation is double devs, and tips is updated, then the updated donation value should still be double the devs value).
If I've got that right, then this should work for you:
var tips = 5;
var devs = 20;
var donation = 75;
var setTips = function(newValue) {
tips = newValue;
var sum = devs + donation;
var devShare = devs / sum; // the share devs gets between devs and donation
var donationShare = 1 - devShare; // or could calculate as donation / sum
devs = (100 - tips) * devShare; // the remaining times it's share ratio
donation = (100 - tips) * donationShare; // the remaining times it's share ratio
};
// test it out
setTips(50);
console.log(tips, devs, donation);

How to compute the sum and average of elements in an array? [duplicate]

Want to improve this post? Provide detailed answers to this question, including citations and an explanation of why your answer is correct. Answers without enough detail may be edited or deleted.
This question already has answers here:
How to find the sum of an array of numbers
(59 answers)
Closed 3 months ago.
I am having problems adding all the elements of an array as well as averaging them out. How would I do this and implement it with the code I currently have? The elements are supposed to be defined as I have it below.
<script type="text/javascript">
//<![CDATA[
var i;
var elmt = new Array();
elmt[0] = "0";
elmt[1] = "1";
elmt[2] = "2";
elmt[3] = "3";
elmt[4] = "4";
elmt[5] = "7";
elmt[6] = "8";
elmt[7] = "9";
elmt[8] = "10";
elmt[9] = "11";
// Problem here
for (i = 9; i < 10; i++){
document.write("The sum of all the elements is: " + /* Problem here */ + " The average of all the elements is: " + /* Problem here */ + "<br/>");
}
//]]>
</script>

A solution I consider more elegant:
const sum = times.reduce((a, b) => a + b, 0);
const avg = (sum / times.length) || 0;
console.log(`The sum is: ${sum}. The average is: ${avg}.`);

ES6
const average = arr => arr.reduce( ( p, c ) => p + c, 0 ) / arr.length;
const result = average( [ 4, 4, 5, 6, 6 ] ); // 5
console.log(result);

var sum = 0;
for( var i = 0; i < elmt.length; i++ ){
sum += parseInt( elmt[i], 10 ); //don't forget to add the base
}
var avg = sum/elmt.length;
document.write( "The sum of all the elements is: " + sum + " The average is: " + avg );
Just iterate through the array, since your values are strings, they have to be converted to an integer first. And average is just the sum of values divided by the number of values.

Calculating average (mean) using reduce and ES6:
const average = list => list.reduce((prev, curr) => prev + curr) / list.length;
const list = [0, 10, 20, 30]
average(list) // 15

Shortest one liner for Average
const avg = arr => arr.reduce((acc,v,i,a)=>(acc+v/a.length),0);
Shortest one liner for Sum
const sum = arr => arr.reduce((a,b)=>a+b);

Let's imagine we have an array of integers like this:
var values = [ 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11];
The average is obtained with the following formula
A= (1/n)Σxi ( with i = 1 to n ) ... So: x1/n + x2/n + ... + xn/n
We divide the current value by the number of values and add the previous result to the returned value.
The reduce method signature is
reduce(callback[,default_previous_value])
The reduce callback function takes the following parameters:
p : Result
of the previous calculation
c : Current value (from the current index)
i : Current array element's index value
a : The current reduced Array
The second reduce's parameter is the default value ... (Used in case the array is empty ).
So the average reduce method will be:
var avg = values.reduce(function(p,c,i,a){return p + (c/a.length)},0);
If you prefer you can create a separate function
function average(p,c,i,a){return p + (c/a.length)};
function sum(p,c){return p + c)};
And then simply refer to the callback method signature
var avg = values.reduce(average,0);
var sum= values.reduce(sum,0);
Or Augment the Array prototype directly..
Array.prototype.sum = Array.prototype.sum || function (){
return this.reduce(function(p,c){return p+c},0);
};
It's possible to divide the value each time the reduce method is called..
Array.prototype.avg = Array.prototype.avg || function () {
return this.reduce(function(p,c,i,a){return p+(c/a.length)},0);
};
Or even better , using the previously defined Array.protoype.sum()
method, optimize the process my calling the division only once :)
Array.prototype.avg = Array.prototype.avg || function () {
return this.sum()/this.length;
};
Then on any Array object of the scope:
[2, 6].avg();// -> 4
[2, 6].sum();// -> 8
NB: an empty array with return a NaN wish is more correct than 0 in my point of view and can be useful in specific use cases.

generally average using one-liner reduce is like this
elements.reduce(function(sum, a,i,ar) { sum += a; return i==ar.length-1?(ar.length==0?0:sum/ar.length):sum},0);
specifically to question asked
elements.reduce(function(sum, a,i,ar) { sum += parseFloat(a); return i==ar.length-1?(ar.length==0?0:sum/ar.length):sum},0);
an efficient version is like
elements.reduce(function(sum, a) { return sum + a },0)/(elements.length||1);
Understand Javascript Array Reduce in 1 Minute
http://www.airpair.com/javascript/javascript-array-reduce
as gotofritz pointed out seems Array.reduce skips undefined values.
so here is a fix:
(function average(arr){var finalstate=arr.reduce(function(state,a) { state.sum+=a;state.count+=1; return state },{sum:0,count:0}); return finalstate.sum/finalstate.count})([2,,,6])

You can also use lodash, _.sum(array) and _.mean(array) in Math part (also have other convenient stuff).
_.sum([4, 2, 8, 6]);
// => 20
_.mean([4, 2, 8, 6]);
// => 5

Not the fastest, but the shortest and in one line is using map() & reduce():
var average = [7,14,21].map(function(x,i,arr){return x/arr.length}).reduce(function(a,b){return a + b})

I use these methods in my personal library:
Array.prototype.sum = Array.prototype.sum || function() {
return this.reduce(function(sum, a) { return sum + Number(a) }, 0);
}
Array.prototype.average = Array.prototype.average || function() {
return this.sum() / (this.length || 1);
}
EDIT:
To use them, simply ask the array for its sum or average, like:
[1,2,3].sum() // = 6
[1,2,3].average() // = 2

In ES6-ready browsers this polyfill may be helpful.
Math.sum = (...a) => Array.prototype.reduce.call(a,(a,b) => a+b)
Math.avg = (...a) => Math.sum(...a)/a.length;
You can share same call method between Math.sum,Math.avg and Math.max,such as
var maxOne = Math.max(1,2,3,4) // 4;
you can use Math.sum as
var sumNum = Math.sum(1,2,3,4) // 10
or if you have an array to sum up,you can use
var sumNum = Math.sum.apply(null,[1,2,3,4]) // 10
just like
var maxOne = Math.max.apply(null,[1,2,3,4]) // 4

One sneaky way you could do it although it does require the use of (the much hated) eval().
var sum = eval(elmt.join('+')), avg = sum / elmt.length;
document.write("The sum of all the elements is: " + sum + " The average of all the elements is: " + avg + "<br/>");
Just thought I'd post this as one of those 'outside the box' options. You never know, the slyness might grant you (or taketh away) a point.

Here is a quick addition to the “Math” object in javascript to add a “average” command to it!!
Math.average = function(input) {
this.output = 0;
for (this.i = 0; this.i < input.length; this.i++) {
this.output+=Number(input[this.i]);
}
return this.output/input.length;
}
Then i have this addition to the “Math” object for getting the sum!
Math.sum = function(input) {
this.output = 0;
for (this.i = 0; this.i < input.length; this.i++) {
this.output+=Number(input[this.i]);
}
return this.output;
}
So then all you do is
alert(Math.sum([5,5,5])); //alerts “15”
alert(Math.average([10,0,5])); //alerts “5”
And where i put the placeholder array just pass in your variable (The input if they are numbers can be a string because of it parsing to a number!)

I found Mansilla's answer to work fine with the extension of making sure that I am doing summation of floats and not concatonation of strings using parseFloat():
let sum = ourarray.reduce((a, b) => parseFloat(a) + parseFloat(b), 0);
let avg = (sum / ourarray.length) || 0;
console.log(sum); // print out sum
console.log(avg); // print out avg

set your for loop counter to 0.... you're getting element 9 and then you're done as you have it now. The other answers are basic math. Use a variable to store your sum (need to cast the strings to ints), and divide by your array length.

Start by defining all of the variables we plan on using. You'll note that for the numbers array, I'm using the literal notation of [] as opposed to the constructor method array(). Additionally, I'm using a shorter method to set multiple variables to 0.
var numbers = [], count = sum = avg = 0;
Next I'm populating my empty numbers array with the values 0 through 11. This is to get me to your original starting point. Note how I'm pushing onto the array count++. This pushing the current value of count, and then increments it for the next time around.
while ( count < 12 )
numbers.push( count++ );
Lastly, I'm performing a function "for each" of the numbers in the numbers array. This function will handle one number at a time, which I'm identifying as "n" within the function body.
numbers.forEach(function(n){
sum += n;
avg = sum / numbers.length;
});
In the end, we can output both the sum value, and the avg value to our console in order to see the result:
// Sum: 66, Avg: 5.5
console.log( 'Sum: ' + sum + ', Avg: ' + avg );
See it in action online at http://jsbin.com/unukoj/3/edit

I am just building on Abdennour TOUMI's answer. here are the reasons why:
1.) I agree with Brad, I do not think it is a good idea to extend object that we did not create.
2.) array.length is exactly reliable in javascript, I prefer Array.reduce beacuse a=[1,3];a[1000]=5; , now a.length would return 1001.
function getAverage(arry){
// check if array
if(!(Object.prototype.toString.call(arry) === '[object Array]')){
return 0;
}
var sum = 0, count = 0;
sum = arry.reduce(function(previousValue, currentValue, index, array) {
if(isFinite(currentValue)){
count++;
return previousValue+ parseFloat(currentValue);
}
return previousValue;
}, sum);
return count ? sum / count : 0;
};

Array.prototype.avg=function(fn){
fn =fn || function(e,i){return e};
return (this.map(fn).reduce(function(a,b){return parseFloat(a)+parseFloat(b)},0) / this.length ) ;
};
Then :
[ 1 , 2 , 3].avg() ; //-> OUT : 2
[{age:25},{age:26},{age:27}].avg(function(e){return e.age}); // OUT : 26

On evergreen browsers you can use arrow functions
avg = [1,2,3].reduce((a,b) => (a+b);
Running it 100,000 times, the time difference between the for loop approach and reduce is negligible.
s=Date.now();for(i=0;i<100000;i++){ n=[1,2,3]; a=n.reduce((a,b) => (a+b)) / n.length };
console.log("100k reduce took " + (Date.now()-s) + "ms.");
s=Date.now();for(i=0;i<100000;i++){n=[1,2,3]; nl=n.length; a=0; for(j=nl-1;j>0;j--){a=a+n[j];} a/nl };
console.log("100k for loop took " + (Date.now()-s) + "ms.");
s=Date.now();for(i=0;i<1000000;i++){n=[1,2,3]; nl=n.length; a=0; for(j=nl-1;j>0;j--){a=a+n[j];} a/nl };
console.log("1M for loop took " + (Date.now()-s) + "ms.");
s=Date.now();for(i=0;i<1000000;i++){ n=[1,2,3]; a=n.reduce((a,b) => (a+b)) / n.length };
console.log("1M reduce took " + (Date.now()-s) + "ms.");
/*
* RESULT on Chrome 51
* 100k reduce took 26ms.
* 100k for loop took 35ms.
* 10M for loop took 126ms.
* 10M reduce took 209ms.
*/

If you are in need of the average and can skip the requirement of calculating the sum, you can compute the average with a single call of reduce:
// Assumes an array with only values that can be parsed to a Float
var reducer = function(cumulativeAverage, currentValue, currentIndex) {
// 1. multiply average by currentIndex to find cumulative sum of previous elements
// 2. add currentValue to get cumulative sum, including current element
// 3. divide by total number of elements, including current element (zero-based index + 1)
return (cumulativeAverage * currentIndex + parseFloat(currentValue))/(currentIndex + 1)
}
console.log([1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10].reduce(reducer, 0)); // => 5.5
console.log([].reduce(reducer, 0)); // => 0
console.log([0].reduce(reducer, 0)); // => 0
console.log([].reduce(reducer, 0)); // => 0
console.log([,,,].reduce(reducer, 0)); // => 0
console.log([].reduce(reducer, 0)); // => 0

If anyone ever needs it - Here is a recursive average.
In the context of the original question, you may want to use the recursive average if you allowed the user to insert additional values and, without incurring the cost of visiting each element again, wanted to "update" the existing average.
/**
* Computes the recursive average of an indefinite set
* #param {Iterable<number>} set iterable sequence to average
* #param {number} initAvg initial average value
* #param {number} initCount initial average count
*/
function average(set, initAvg, initCount) {
if (!set || !set[Symbol.iterator])
throw Error("must pass an iterable sequence");
let avg = initAvg || 0;
let avgCnt = initCount || 0;
for (let x of set) {
avgCnt += 1;
avg = avg * ((avgCnt - 1) / avgCnt) + x / avgCnt;
}
return avg; // or {avg: avg, count: avgCnt};
}
average([2, 4, 6]); //returns 4
average([4, 6], 2, 1); //returns 4
average([6], 3, 2); //returns 4
average({
*[Symbol.iterator]() {
yield 2; yield 4; yield 6;
}
}); //returns 4
How:
this works by maintaining the current average and element count. When a new value is to be included you increment count by 1, scale the existing average by (count-1) / count, and add newValue / count to the average.
Benefits:
you don't sum all the elements, which may result in large number that cannot be stored in a 64-bit float.
you can "update" an existing average if additional values become available.
you can perform a rolling average without knowing the sequence length.
Downsides:
incurs lots more divisions
not infinite - limited to Number.MAX_SAFE_INTEGER items unless you employ BigNumber

Having read the other choices, I will try to make a simpler version for the future viewers, elaborating on the existing code and not creating a more elegant one. First of all, you declared the numbers as strings. Apart from the .parseInt we can also do:
const numberConverter = elmt.map(Number);
So what map does is that it "returns a copy of the original array". But I convert its values to numbers. Then we can use the reduce method (It can also be simpler, but I am writing easy to read versions and I also have 2 average methods) What the reduce method does is it has an accumulator that gets bigger and bigger if you add values to it, as it iterates through the array and adds (in this case) the currentValue to it.:
var i;
const elmt = new Array();
elmt[0] = '0';
elmt[1] = '1';
elmt[2] = '2';
elmt[3] = '3';
elmt[4] = '4';
elmt[5] = '7';
elmt[6] = '8';
elmt[7] = '9';
elmt[8] = '10';
elmt[9] = '11';
console.log(elmt);
const numberConverter = elmt.map(Number);
const sum = numberConverter.reduce((accumulator, currentValue) => {
return accumulator + currentValue;
}, 0);
const average = numberConverter.reduce(
(accumulator, currentvalue, index, numArray) => {
return accumulator + currentvalue / numArray.length;
},
0
);
const average2 =
numberConverter.reduce(
(accumulator, currentValue) => accumulator + currentValue,
0
) / numberConverter.length;
for (i = 9; i < 10; i++) {
console.log(
`The sum of all the elements is: ${sum}. <br> The average of all the elements is: ${average2}`
);}

Unless I missed something, every solution up to this point uses the length of the list to calculate the average after summing the values.
There is a downside to this approach that a slightly modified, yet still simple algorithm will address without the downsides.
The downside is that you assuming that there won't be an overflow by summing all the numbers. If you have a lot of numbers that are very big, and you add them all up, they may exceed the maximum size that can fit into the data type.
A better approach is to simply calculate the average as you go, rather than summing it and then dividing with the length at the end:
function getAvg(values) {
return values.reduce((m, x, i) => m + (x - m) / (i + 1), 0)
}
Props to Knuth's "Art of Computer Programming" vol. 2.

just for fun
let avg = [81, 77, -88, 195, 6.8].reduce((a,e,i) => (a*i+e)/(i+1));
console.log(avg)

Just for kicks:
var elmt = [0, 1, 2,3, 4, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11], l = elmt.length, i = -1, sum = 0;
for (; ++i < l; sum += elmt[i])
;
document.body.appendChild(document.createTextNode('The sum of all the elements is: ' + sum + ' The average of all the elements is: ' + (sum / l)));

I think we can do like
var k=elmt.reduce(function(a,b){return parseFloat(a+parseFloat(b));})
var avg=k/elmt.length;
console.log(avg);
I am using parseFloat twice because
when
1) you add (a)9+b("1") number then result will be "91" but we want addition. so i used parseFloat
2)When addition of (a)9+parseFloat("1") happen though result will be "10" but it will be in string which we don't want so again i used parseFloat.
I hope i am clear. Suggestions are welcome

Here is my rookie way of simply finding the avg. Hope this helps somebody.
function numAvg(num){
var total = 0;
for(var i = 0;i < num.length; i++) {
total+=num[i];
}
return total/num.length;
}

here's your one liner:
var average = arr.reduce((sum,item,index,arr)=>index !== arr.length-1?sum+item:sum+item/arr.length,0)

I think this may be a direct solution to calculate the average with a for loop and function.
var elmts = [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11];
function average(arr) {
var total = 0;
for (var i = 0; i < arr.length; i++) {
total += arr[i];
}
console.log(Math.round(total/arr.length));
}
average(elmts);

There seem to be an endless number of solutions for this but I found this to be concise and elegant.
const numbers = [1,2,3,4];
const count = numbers.length;
const reducer = (adder, value) => (adder + value);
const average = numbers.map(x => x/count).reduce(reducer);
console.log(average); // 2.5
Or more consisely:
const numbers = [1,2,3,4];
const average = numbers.map(x => x/numbers.length).reduce((adder, value) => (adder + value));
console.log(average); // 2.5
Depending on your browser you may need to do explicit function calls because arrow functions are not supported:
const r = function (adder, value) {
return adder + value;
};
const m = function (x) {
return x/count;
};
const average = numbers.map(m).reduce(r);
console.log(average); // 2.5
Or:
const average1 = numbers
.map(function (x) {
return x/count;
})
.reduce(function (adder, value) {
return adder + value;
});
console.log(average1);