I just practiced a standard basic whiteboard problem: Create an array filled with integers from 0 through n. My solution worked but there were others posted that had very unusual syntax. I am really trying to understand it but the MDN docs aren't helping me very much. I can put together how {length: n} works but (_, i) => i seems strange. _ is the unnamed function and it takes in i and returns i? but why is that there? I would love any help.
My solution:
function arr(n){
var newArr = [];
for(var i = 0; i < n; i++){
newArr.push(i);
}
return newArr;
}
New syntax solution:
const arr = n => Array.from({length: n}, (_, i) => i);
The first argument to the mapper function Array.from can accept indicates the current element being iterated over. That is, from an array-like collection of length 3, for example, that argument will be arrLike[0], or arrLike[1], or arrLike[2].
If there aren't any elements at that point in the collection, like here, then accessing those indicies will return undefined:
const arr = n => Array.from({length: n}, (_, i) => {
console.log(_);
return i;
});
arr(3);
The underscore is just a variable name. You can define it however you want. It's a common convention for an unused argument to be called _, but it's only a convention, not a syntax rule.
Since the mapper function only cares about the current index being iterated over in order to construct the new array, it defines the second argument i and then returns it immediately. (Array.from can iterate over any object with a length property, from 0 to length - 1. Even if none of those properties actually exist on the object, the index, the second argument, will still be incremented from 0 up to length - 1.)
I'm just a bit confused about how the this keyword is used in this context. It is placed in an anonymous function with the parameter callback and is then used as such: callback(this[i], i, this). The exercise doesn't go into depth, but I understand that the this is referring to the ar object that is in the __proto__. Why are 3 arguments being placed in the anonymous function's parameter callback(this[i],i,this)and how is it working under the hood? Any insight would be greatly appreciated, thank you.
Just to add to what was previously said, the exercise asked for me to implement my own version of Array.prototype.map.
Array.prototype.map = function(callback) {
let arr = [];
for(let i = 0; i < this.length; i++){
arr.push(callback(this[i], i , this))
}
return arr;
}
let ar = new Array()
The map function will be called on an Array instance, so in the following lines of code:
for(let i = 0; i < this.length; i++){
arr.push(callback(this[i], i , this))
}
is as per the signature of the callback function passed to the Array.prototype.map method:
callback Function that produces an element of the new Array, taking
three arguments:
currentValue The current element being processed in the array.
index Optional The index of the current element being processed in the
array.
array Optional The array map was called upon.
So to breakdown the the three arguments in the callback function in your snippet:
this[i] translates to the first parameter of the map callback, which is the currentValue. As you understood correctly this is the array instance on which the map is called. So this[i] will refer to the value in the ith index of the array
i is the index or current index. This is the ith index of the iteration of the for loop being sent to the callback.
this is an reference to the array itself on which the map is invoked.
const arr = [1, 2, 3];
const callback = function(currentElement, index, array){
console.log(`The current element ${currentElement}`);
console.log(`The current index ${index}`);
console.log(`The array instance ${array}`);
return currentElement * 2; //multiplies each element with 2, this is the mapping operation
}
const mappedArray = arr.map(callback);
console.log(`The mapped array ${mappedArray}`);
I have a function that takes in an array of objects and a string, which represents a property. The function should return an array containing that property from each object.
Here is my sample code:
function pluck(array, property) {
var newArr = [];
array.map(function(paints){
return newArr.push(paints[property]);
});
return newArr;
}
This returns a new array and it works. But when the function is taking in an array of objects as one of the arguments...what gets passed to the anonymous iterator function in the map method? The value of the key?
How would it iterate over an array of objects using the map method?
The comments on your question explain what is happening in your code.
When you call map on an array, the mapping function is provided with 3 arguments, which are used always, sometimes and rarely in that order.
const result = items.map(function(element, index, items) {
// do the mapping
});
The function is called for each element of the original array items in turn, and the result of the function placed in the same index position of the result array.
The function arguments are:
element - this is the current element from the array
index - the current index
items - the original array on which map was called
Your pluck function could be written as:
function pluck(arr, prop) {
return arr.map(item => item[prop]);
}
I am just wondering why it is not possible to make forEach on array of undefined.
Code:
var arr = new Array(5); // [undefined x 5]
//ES5 forEach
arr.forEach(function(elem, index, array) {
console.log(index);
});
//underscore each
_.each(arr, function(elem, index, array) {
console.log(index);
});
Both examples do not execute function.
Now to make foreach, I have to make:
var arr = [0,0,0,0,0];
Then make forEach on it.
I am trying to make an array with specified size and loop through it, avoiding for loop. I think that it is clearer using forEach than for loop.
With array with length 5 it is not a problem, but it would be ugly with bigger arrays.
Why there is a problem looping through array of undefined values ?
Array(5) is essentialy equivalent to
var arr = [];
arr.length = 5;
In javascript changing array's length doesn't set any values for it's numeric properties nor does it define those properties in the array object. So numeric properties are undefined instead of having undefined value. You can check it by using:
Object.keys(arr)
When iterating javascript iterates through numeric properties of the array, so if these don't exist, there is nothing to iterate over.
You can check it by doing:
var arr = Array(5)
//prints nothing
arr.forEach(function(elem, index, array) {
console.log(index);
});
arr[3] = 'hey'
//prints only 'hey' even though arr.length === 5
arr.forEach(function(elem, index, array) {
console.log(index);
});
The following code:
var arr = [undefined, undefined];
creates and array of length ===2 and sets the both numeric properties 0 and 1 to undefined.
Looking at a simplified implementation of .forEach() may help.
Array.prototype.my_for_each = function(callback, thisArg) {
for (var i = 0; i < this.length; i++) {
if (i in this) {
callback.call(thisArg, this[i], i, this);
}
}
};
So you can see that what happens is that the method does iterate the entire Array (according to the spec), but it only invokes the callback if the member actually exists. It checks by looking for the property (the index) using the in operator, which tests to see if the object either has or inherits the property.
If in shows that the index exists, the callback is invoked.
So given this Array:
var arr = ["foo", "bar", "baz"];
This will output all 3 items:
arr.my_for_each(function(item) {
console.log(item);
});
// "foo" "bar" "baz"
But if we use delete to remove a member, it leaves a hole in the Array, which will now get passed over.
delete arr[1];
arr.my_for_each(function(item) {
console.log(item);
});
// "foo" "baz"
When you created an Array using Array(5), it created one without any members, but with the .length set to 5. So this is an example of a sparse Array (very sparse in this instance). Because none of the indices will be found by in, the callback is never invoked.
You can use Array.from to create an array and pass lambda function that will be invoked on each item in the array.
detailed documentation
const arr = Array.from(
{ length: 5 },
() => 0
)
console.log(arr)
Other answers have explained the problem, but not provided solutions.
ES6 Spread syntax fills in sparse values with undefined. So does Array.apply(null, sparseArray), which has the benefit of working in older browsers, but takes a bit more work to understand.
const sparseArray = new Array(5);
const unsparseArray1 = Array.apply(null, sparseArray);
const unsparseArray2 = [...sparseArray];
function arrayApply() {
// ES5 forEach works with either approach
unsparseArray1.forEach(function(elem, index, array) {
console.log(index);
});
}
function es6Spread() {
// Lodash each works with either approach
_.each(unsparseArray2, function(elem, index, array) {
console.log(index);
});
}
<html><head>
<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/lodash#4.17.21/lodash.min.js"></script>
<title>Making sparse arrays unsparse</title>
</head><body>
<p><button onclick="arrayApply();">Array.apply(null, sparseArray)</button></p>
<p><button onclick="es6Spread();">[...sparseArray]</button></p>
</body>
</html>
In my case, I was looking for an elegant solution to creating an array of digits starting with 0 to X.
In an elegant manner with arrow functions, it comes up with a 1 line of code
const arrayLength = 10;
const arrayOfDigits = Array.apply(null, Array(arrayLength)).map((_, index) => index);
Appeared to me quite a sophisticated one, much more than a separate block of code with a for cycle.
I would like to filter an array of items by using the map() function. Here is a code snippet:
var filteredItems = items.map(function(item)
{
if( ...some condition... )
{
return item;
}
});
The problem is that filtered out items still uses space in the array and I would like to completely wipe them out.
Any idea?
EDIT: Thanks, I forgot about filter(), what I wanted is actually a filter() then a map().
EDIT2: Thanks for pointing that map() and filter() are not implemented in all browsers, although my specific code was not intended to run in a browser.
You should use the filter method rather than map unless you want to mutate the items in the array, in addition to filtering.
eg.
var filteredItems = items.filter(function(item)
{
return ...some condition...;
});
[Edit: Of course you could always do sourceArray.filter(...).map(...) to both filter and mutate]
Inspired by writing this answer, I ended up later expanding and writing a blog post going over this in careful detail. I recommend checking that out if you want to develop a deeper understanding of how to think about this problem--I try to explain it piece by piece, and also give a JSperf comparison at the end, going over speed considerations.
That said, **The tl;dr is this:
To accomplish what you're asking for (filtering and mapping within one function call), you would use Array.reduce()**.
However, the more readable and (less importantly) usually significantly faster2 approach is to just use filter and map chained together:
[1,2,3].filter(num => num > 2).map(num => num * 2)
What follows is a description of how Array.reduce() works, and how it can be used to accomplish filter and map in one iteration. Again, if this is too condensed, I highly recommend seeing the blog post linked above, which is a much more friendly intro with clear examples and progression.
You give reduce an argument that is a (usually anonymous) function.
That anonymous function takes two parameters--one (like the anonymous functions passed in to map/filter/forEach) is the iteratee to be operated on. There is another argument for the anonymous function passed to reduce, however, that those functions do not accept, and that is the value that will be passed along between function calls, often referred to as the memo.
Note that while Array.filter() takes only one argument (a function), Array.reduce() also takes an important (though optional) second argument: an initial value for 'memo' that will be passed into that anonymous function as its first argument, and subsequently can be mutated and passed along between function calls. (If it is not supplied, then 'memo' in the first anonymous function call will by default be the first iteratee, and the 'iteratee' argument will actually be the second value in the array)
In our case, we'll pass in an empty array to start, and then choose whether to inject our iteratee into our array or not based on our function--this is the filtering process.
Finally, we'll return our 'array in progress' on each anonymous function call, and reduce will take that return value and pass it as an argument (called memo) to its next function call.
This allows filter and map to happen in one iteration, cutting down our number of required iterations in half--just doing twice as much work each iteration, though, so nothing is really saved other than function calls, which are not so expensive in javascript.
For a more complete explanation, refer to MDN docs (or to my post referenced at the beginning of this answer).
Basic example of a Reduce call:
let array = [1,2,3];
const initialMemo = [];
array = array.reduce((memo, iteratee) => {
// if condition is our filter
if (iteratee > 1) {
// what happens inside the filter is the map
memo.push(iteratee * 2);
}
// this return value will be passed in as the 'memo' argument
// to the next call of this function, and this function will have
// every element passed into it at some point.
return memo;
}, initialMemo)
console.log(array) // [4,6], equivalent to [(2 * 2), (3 * 2)]
more succinct version:
[1,2,3].reduce((memo, value) => value > 1 ? memo.concat(value * 2) : memo, [])
Notice that the first iteratee was not greater than one, and so was filtered. Also note the initialMemo, named just to make its existence clear and draw attention to it. Once again, it is passed in as 'memo' to the first anonymous function call, and then the returned value of the anonymous function is passed in as the 'memo' argument to the next function.
Another example of the classic use case for memo would be returning the smallest or largest number in an array. Example:
[7,4,1,99,57,2,1,100].reduce((memo, val) => memo > val ? memo : val)
// ^this would return the largest number in the list.
An example of how to write your own reduce function (this often helps understanding functions like these, I find):
test_arr = [];
// we accept an anonymous function, and an optional 'initial memo' value.
test_arr.my_reducer = function(reduceFunc, initialMemo) {
// if we did not pass in a second argument, then our first memo value
// will be whatever is in index zero. (Otherwise, it will
// be that second argument.)
const initialMemoIsIndexZero = arguments.length < 2;
// here we use that logic to set the memo value accordingly.
let memo = initialMemoIsIndexZero ? this[0] : initialMemo;
// here we use that same boolean to decide whether the first
// value we pass in as iteratee is either the first or second
// element
const initialIteratee = initialMemoIsIndexZero ? 1 : 0;
for (var i = initialIteratee; i < this.length; i++) {
// memo is either the argument passed in above, or the
// first item in the list. initialIteratee is either the
// first item in the list, or the second item in the list.
memo = reduceFunc(memo, this[i]);
// or, more technically complete, give access to base array
// and index to the reducer as well:
// memo = reduceFunc(memo, this[i], i, this);
}
// after we've compressed the array into a single value,
// we return it.
return memo;
}
The real implementation allows access to things like the index, for example, but I hope this helps you get an uncomplicated feel for the gist of it.
That's not what map does. You really want Array.filter. Or if you really want to remove the elements from the original list, you're going to need to do it imperatively with a for loop.
Array Filter method
var arr = [1, 2, 3]
// ES5 syntax
arr = arr.filter(function(item){ return item != 3 })
// ES2015 syntax
arr = arr.filter(item => item != 3)
console.log( arr )
You must note however that the Array.filter is not supported in all browser so, you must to prototyped:
//This prototype is provided by the Mozilla foundation and
//is distributed under the MIT license.
//http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/Linux/LICENSES/mit.license
if (!Array.prototype.filter)
{
Array.prototype.filter = function(fun /*, thisp*/)
{
var len = this.length;
if (typeof fun != "function")
throw new TypeError();
var res = new Array();
var thisp = arguments[1];
for (var i = 0; i < len; i++)
{
if (i in this)
{
var val = this[i]; // in case fun mutates this
if (fun.call(thisp, val, i, this))
res.push(val);
}
}
return res;
};
}
And doing so, you can prototype any method you may need.
TLDR: Use map (returning undefined when needed) and then filter.
First, I believe that a map + filter function is useful since you don't want to repeat a computation in both. Swift originally called this function flatMap but then renamed it to compactMap.
For example, if we don't have a compactMap function, we might end up with computation defined twice:
let array = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8];
let mapped = array
.filter(x => {
let computation = x / 2 + 1;
let isIncluded = computation % 2 === 0;
return isIncluded;
})
.map(x => {
let computation = x / 2 + 1;
return `${x} is included because ${computation} is even`
})
// Output: [2 is included because 2 is even, 6 is included because 4 is even]
Thus compactMap would be useful to reduce duplicate code.
A really simple way to do something similar to compactMap is to:
Map on real values or undefined.
Filter out all the undefined values.
This of course relies on you never needing to return undefined values as part of your original map function.
Example:
let array = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8];
let mapped = array
.map(x => {
let computation = x / 2 + 1;
let isIncluded = computation % 2 === 0;
if (isIncluded) {
return `${x} is included because ${computation} is even`
} else {
return undefined
}
})
.filter(x => typeof x !== "undefined")
I just wrote array intersection that correctly handles also duplicates
https://gist.github.com/gkucmierz/8ee04544fa842411f7553ef66ac2fcf0
// array intersection that correctly handles also duplicates
const intersection = (a1, a2) => {
const cnt = new Map();
a2.map(el => cnt[el] = el in cnt ? cnt[el] + 1 : 1);
return a1.filter(el => el in cnt && 0 < cnt[el]--);
};
const l = console.log;
l(intersection('1234'.split``, '3456'.split``)); // [ '3', '4' ]
l(intersection('12344'.split``, '3456'.split``)); // [ '3', '4' ]
l(intersection('1234'.split``, '33456'.split``)); // [ '3', '4' ]
l(intersection('12334'.split``, '33456'.split``)); // [ '3', '3', '4' ]
First you can use map and with chaining you can use filter
state.map(item => {
if(item.id === action.item.id){
return {
id : action.item.id,
name : item.name,
price: item.price,
quantity : item.quantity-1
}
}else{
return item;
}
}).filter(item => {
if(item.quantity <= 0){
return false;
}else{
return true;
}
});
following statement cleans object using map function.
var arraytoclean = [{v:65, toberemoved:"gronf"}, {v:12, toberemoved:null}, {v:4}];
arraytoclean.map((x,i)=>x.toberemoved=undefined);
console.dir(arraytoclean);