We Keep Coding

Why am I getting one empty array item in every other array like a pattern? (JavaScript)

UPDATE AT THE BOTTOM OF THE POST!
This is the first part of a program that will eventually make SVG star polygons.
Only star polygons that can be made in one go, I.e. like a Pentagram, NOT like a Hexagram that can only be made with at least 2 shapes I.e. 2 inverted and overlapping triangles.
I'm almost finished with this. Everything seems to be working well and I'm getting the out put I want except there's an empty array item in every other array produced for some reason.
In this part
I'm printing to the console (for testing) an object with items named with numbers that represent the number of points / sides of a regular polygon. Within each item is an array with the lower half of all the non factoring numbers of that item (number) I.e. an array of numbers that when the number (item name) is divided by them, it will return a fraction.
E.g. Object
starPolygons{'5': 2, '7': 3, 2, '8': 3, '9': 4, 2, …}
(Representation of: Pentagon: Heptagon: Octagon: Nonagon: …)
What "qty_test" functions does
The points variable (= 8 for example) is sent to a function (qty_test) which is used to find the number of divisors I need to test and inside it is divided by 2. If the result is a fraction, it will return the result rounded back, and if its even, it will return the result - 1.
//8 has more divisors to cycle through -so its a better example!
//In the real program, it will be 5.
let points = 8;
let starPolygons = {};
E.g. qty_test
point (=8) ()=> n /= 2 (=4)
if n - n(rounded-back) = 0?
true returns (n -1) and false returns n(rounded-back)
function qty_test(n) {
n /= 2;
let divisorQTY = n - Math.floor(n) !== 0;
return divisorQTY ? Math.floor(n) : (n - 1);
};
What divisor_test functions does
This function uses the number returned from the previous function (n) to set a for loop that tests every cycle if n is not a factor of the value of the points variable. I.e. points divided by n returns a fraction and if it returns true, meaning a fraction was produced n`s value is indexed in an array and decreaces by 1 (--n).
E.g. divisor_test
n(=8) / 2 = 4 << 2 will be ignored.
n(=8) / 3 = 2.666... << 3 will be collected
function divisor_test(n) {
let nonFactors = [];
n = qty_test(n);
for (let index = 0; index <= n; index++) {
let quotient = (points / n) - Math.floor(points / n) !== 0;
quotient ? nonFactors[index] = n-- : --n;
};
return nonFactors;
};
The program cycles through 5 - 360 and indexes an object with numbers (5-360) and array list of their lower half non factor numbers.
while (points <= 360) {
nonFactors = divisor_test(points);
let testArray = nonFactors.length;
if (testArray) starPolygons[String(points)] = nonFactors;
points++;
};
console.log(starPolygons);
AS YOU CAN SEE IN THIS IMAGE. THE PATTERN OF EMPTY ARRAY INDEXES / ITEMS
UPDATE: I NOTICED THE PATTERN OF ARRAYS WITH THE EMPTY SLOTS HAS AN INTERESTING QUALITY TO IT. This is so cool and so confusing as to what causes this...

During the Iteration you are forcing the array to add an empty item.
So, the empty object appears when the array has only two items in it and you are trying to nonFactors[3] = n--;
and thats what causes the issue.
So a more simplified version of the for loop with the solution will be
for (let index = 0; index <= n; index++) {
let quotient = (points / n) - Math.floor(points / n) !== 0;
if(quotient){
if(index > nonFactors.length){
nonFactors[index - 1] = n--
}else{
nonFactors[index] = n--
}
}else{
n = n -1;
}
};

I solved my problem
There's an answer here that already explains what causes the problem and also gives a working solution by Nadav Hury (upvote his answer. I bet his answer generally works better in more situations)! So I will just post my own version of a solution.
for (let index = 0; n >= 2; index++) {
let quotient = (points / n) - Math.floor(points / n) !== 0;
if (quotient) nonFactors[index] = n--;
else --n, --index;
};

The culprit is that in the line with checking the quotient
quotient ? nonFactors[index] = n-- : --n;
you added setting the value only for the case when it is present that is equal to true but you didn't add to the case when it is false correct solution is:
quotient ? nonFactors[index] = n-- : nonFactors[index] = --n;.

creating a function that only returns odd numbers [duplicate]

This question already has answers here:
How do I extract even elements of an Array?
(8 answers)
How to do a script for odd and even numbers from 1 to 1000 in Javascript?
(8 answers)
Closed 2 years ago.
I've spent an embarrassing amount of time on this question only to realize my function is only right 50% of the time. So the goal here is to return only the odd numbers of all the numbers in between the two arguments. (for instance if the arguments are 1 and 5 i'd need to return 2 & 3) the function I wrote is completely dependent on the first argument. if it's even my function will return odds, but if the first number is odd it'll return evens. does anyone know how i can fix this?
function oddNumbers(l, r) {
const arr = [];
const theEvens = [];
for (let i= l; i<r; i++) {
arr.push(i)
}
console.log(arr)
for (let i= 0; i < arr.length; i+= 2 ) {
const evens = arr[0] + i;
theEvens.push(evens);
}
theEvens.forEach(item => arr.splice(arr.indexOf(item), 1));
console.log(arr)
}
oddNumbers(2, 20);

I modified the code a bit to return only odd numbers
We use the % operator that behaves like the remainder operator in math:
so when we say i % 2 if the number is even the result of the operation will be 0
but when the "i" is an odd number the result will be 1
so now we can filter the even from the odd numbers using this operation
function oddNumbers(l, r) {
const arr = [];
for (let i= l; i<r; i++) {
if(i % 2 !== 0) arr.push(i);
}
console.log(arr);
}
oddNumbers(2, 20);

You can loop from initial to end parameters and get odd numbers using modulo, try this:
let result = [];
let returnOdd = (n1, n2) => {
for(i = n1; i < n2; i++){
if(i % 2 != 0){
result.push(i)
}
}
return result;
}
console.log(returnOdd(2, 20));

You could use the filter method.
This method creates a new array based on the condition it has. In this case it will to go through all the numbers in the array, and check if the number is odd (though the remainder operator).
For example:
1 % 2 = 1 ( true, keep in the new array )
2 % 2 = 0 ( false ignore in the new array )
function OddNumbers(start, end) {
// Create an array from the given range
const nums = Array(end - start + 1).fill().map((_, idx) => start + idx);
// Use filter to return the odd numbers via the % operator
return nums.filter(num => num % 2);
}
console.log(OddNumbers(2,20))

javaScript - Find the sum of all divisors of a given integer

i'm doing some coding exercises and i'm not being able to solve this one.
Find the sum of all divisors of a given integer.
For n = 12, the input should be
sumOfDivisors(n) = 28.
example: 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 6 + 12 = 28.
Constraints:
1 ≤ n ≤ 15.
how can i solve this exercise? i'm not being able to.
function(n){
var arr = [],
finalSum;
if(n <= 1 || n => 16){
return false ;
}
for(var i = 0; i < n; i++){
var tmp= n/2;
arr.push(tmp)
// i need to keep on dividing n but i can't get the way of how to
}
return finalSum;
}

This is another way to do it:
var divisors = n=>[...Array(n+1).keys()].slice(1)
.reduce((s, a)=>s+(!(n % a) && a), 0);
console.log(divisors(12));
JSFiddle: https://jsfiddle.net/32n5jdnb/141/
Explaining:
n=> this is an arrow function, the equivalent to function(n) {. You don't need the () if there's only one parameter.
Array(n+1) creates an empty array of n+1 elements
.keys() gets the keys of the empty array (the indexes i.e. 0, 1, 2) so this is a way to create a numeric sequence
[...Array(n+1)].keys()] uses the spread (...) operator to transform the iterator in another array so creating an array with the numeric sequence
.slice(1) removes the first element thus creating a sequence starting with 1. Remember the n+1 ?
.reduce() is a method that iterates though each element and calculates a value in order to reduce the array to one value. It receives as parameter a callback function to calculate the value and the initial value of the calculation
(s, a)=> is the callback function for reduce. It's an arrow function equivalent to function(s, a) {
s+(!(n % a) && a) is the calculation of the value.
s+ s (for sum) or the last value calculated +
!(n % a) this returns true only for the elements that have a 0 as modular value.
(!(n % a) && a) is a js 'trick'. The case is that boolean expressions in javascript don't return true or false. They return a 'truthy' or 'falsy' value which is then converted to boolean. So the actual returned value is the right value for && (considering both have to be truthy) and the first thuthy value found for || (considering only one need to be truthy). So this basically means: if a is a modular value (i.e. != 0) return a to add to the sum, else return 0.
, 0 is the initial value for the reduce calculation.
Reduce documentation: https://developer.mozilla.org/pt-BR/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/Array/Reduce
Edit
Answering to Tristan Forward:
var divisorsList = [];
var divisors = (n)=>[...Array(n+1).keys()].slice(1)
.reduce((s, a)=>{
var divisor = !(n % a) && a;
if (divisor) divisorsList.push(divisor);
return s+divisor;
}, 0);
console.log('Result:', divisors(12));
console.log('Divisors:', divisorsList);

You have to check if specified number is or not a divisor of given integer. You can use modulo % - if there's no rest, specified number is the divisor of the given integer - add it to the sum.
function sumDivisors(num){
var sum = 0;
for (var i = 1; i <= num; i++){
if (!(num % i)) {
sum += i;
}
}
console.log(sum);
}
sumDivisors(6);
sumDivisors(10);

Here is a solution with better algorithm performance (O(sqrt(largest prime factor of n)))
divisors = n => {
sum = 1
for (i = 2; n > 1; i++) {
i * i > n ? i = n : 0
b = 0
while (n % i < 1) {
c = sum * i
sum += c - b
b = c
n /= i
}
}
return sum
}

since n / i is also a devisor this can be done more efficiently.
function sumDivisors(num) {
let sum = 1;
for (let i = 2; i < num / i; i++) {
if (num % i === 0) {
sum += i + num / i;
}
}
const sqrt = Math.sqrt(num);
return num + (num % sqrt === 0 ? sum + sqrt : sum);
}

function countDivisors(n){
let counter = 1;
for(let i=1; i <= n/2; i++){
n % i === 0 ? counter++ : null;
}
return counter
}
in this case, we consider our counter as starting with 1 since by default all numbers are divisible by 1. Then we half the number since numbers that can be able to divide n are less or equal to half its value

Permutations without recursive function call

Requirement: Algorithm to generate all possible combinations of a set , without duplicates , or recursively calling function to return results.
The majority , if not all of the Answers provided at Permutations in JavaScript? recursively call a function from within a loop or other function to return results.
Example of recursive function call within loop
function p(a, b, res) {
var b = b || [], res = res || [], len = a.length;
if (!len)
res.push(b)
else
for (var i = 0; i < len
// recursive call to `p` here
; p(a.slice(0, i).concat(a.slice(i + 1, len)), b.concat(a[i]), res)
, i++
);
return res
}
p(["a", "b", "c"]);
The current Question attempts to create the given permutation in a linear process , relying on the previous permutation.
For example , given an array
var arr = ["a", "b", "c"];
to determine the total number of possible permutations
for (var len = 1, i = k = arr.length; len < i ; k *= len++);
k should return 6 , or total number of possible permutations of arr ["a", "b", "c"]
With the total number of individual permutations determined for a set , the resulting array which would contain all six permutations could be created and filled using Array.prototype.slice() , Array.prototype.concat() and Array.prototype.reverse()
var res = new Array(new Array(k));
res[0] = arr;
res[1] = res[0].slice(0,1).concat(res[0].slice(-2).reverse());
res[2] = res[1].slice(-1).concat(res[1].slice(0,2));
res[3] = res[2].slice(0,1).concat(res[2].slice(-2).reverse());
res[4] = res[3].slice(-2).concat(res[3].slice(0,1));
res[5] = res[4].slice(0,1).concat(res[4].slice(-2).reverse());
Attempted to reproduce results based on the pattern displayed at the graph for An Ordered Lexicographic Permutation Algorithm based on one published in Practical Algorithms in C++ at Calculating Permutations and Job Interview Questions .
There appears to be a pattern that could be extended if the input set was , for example
["a", "b", "c", "d", "e"]
where 120 permutations would be expected.
An example of an attempt at filling array relying only on previous permutation
// returns duplicate entries at `j`
var arr = ["a", "b", "c", "d", "e"], j = [];
var i = k = arr.length;
arr.forEach(function(a, b, array) {
if (b > 1) {
k *= b;
if (b === i -1) {
for (var q = 0;j.length < k;q++) {
if (q === 0) {
j[q] = array;
} else {
j[q] = !(q % i)
? array.slice(q % i).reverse().concat(array.slice(0, q % i))
: array.slice(q % i).concat(array.slice(0, q % i));
}
}
}
}
})
however have not yet been able to make the necessary adjustments at parameters for .slice() , .concat() , .reverse() at above js to step from one permutation to the next ; while only using the previous array entry within res to determine current permutation , without using recursive.
Noticed even , odd balance of calls and tried to use modulus % operator and input array .length to either call .reverse() or not at ["a", "b", "c", "d", "e"] array , though did not produce results without duplicate entries.
The expected result is that the above pattern could be reduced to two lines called in succession for the duration of the process until all permutations completed, res filled ; one each for call to .reverse() , call without .reverse() ; e.g., after res[0] filled
// odd , how to adjust `.slice()` , `.concat()` parameters
// for array of unknown `n` `.length` ?
res[i] = res[i - 1].slice(0,1).concat(res[i - 1].slice(-2).reverse());
// even
res[i] = res[1 - 1].slice(-1).concat(res[i - 1].slice(0,2));
Question: What adjustments to above pattern are necessary , in particular parameters , or index , passed .slice() , .concat() to produce all possible permutations of a given set without using a recursive call to the currently processing function ?
var arr = ["a", "b", "c"];
for (var len = 1, i = k = arr.length; len < i; k *= len++);
var res = new Array(new Array(k));
res[0] = arr;
res[1] = res[0].slice(0, 1).concat(res[0].slice(-2).reverse());
res[2] = res[1].slice(-1).concat(res[1].slice(0, 2));
res[3] = res[2].slice(0, 1).concat(res[2].slice(-2).reverse());
res[4] = res[3].slice(-2).concat(res[3].slice(0, 1));
res[5] = res[4].slice(0, 1).concat(res[4].slice(-2).reverse());
console.log(res);
Edit, Update
Have found a process to utilize pattern described above to return permutations in lexicographic order for an input up to .length 4 , using a single for loop. Expected results are not returned for array with .length of 5.
The pattern is based on the second chart at "Calculating Permutations and Job Interview Questions"[0].
Would prefer not to use .splice() or .sort() to return results, though used here while attempting to adhere to last "rotate" requirement at each column. The variable r should reference the index of the first element of the next permutation, which it does.
The use of .splice() , .sort() could be included if their usage followed the pattern at the chart ; though at js below, they actually do not.
Not entirely certain that the issue with js below is only the statement following if (i % (total / len) === reset) , though that portion required the most investment of time; yet still does not return expected results.
Specifically, now referring to the chart, at rotating , for example 2 to index 0, 1 to index 2. Attempted to achieve this by using r , which is a negative index, to traverses from right to left to retrieve next item that should be positioned at index 0 of adjacent "column".
At next column, 2 would be placed at index 2 , 3 would be placed at index 0. This is portion, as far as have been able to grasp or debug, so far, is the area where error is occurring.
Again, returns expected results for [1,2,3,4], though not for [1,2,3,4,5]
var arr = [1, 2, 3, 4];
for (var l = 1, j = total = arr.length; l < j ; total *= l++);
for (var i = 1
, reset = 0
, idx = 0
, r = 0
, len = arr.length
, res = [arr]
; i < total; i++) {
// previous permutation
var prev = res[i - 1];
// if we are at permutation `6` here, or, completion of all
// permutations beginning with `1`;
// setting next "column", place `2` at `index` 0;
// following all permutations beginning with `2`, place `3` at
// `index` `0`; with same process for `3` to `4`
if (i % (total / len) === reset) {
r = --r % -(len);
var next = prev.slice(r);
if (r === -1) {
// first implementation used for setting item at index `-1`
// to `index` 0
// would prefer to use single process for all "rotations",
// instead of splitting into `if` , `else`, though not there, yet
res[i] = [next[0]].concat(prev.slice(0, 1), prev.slice(1, len - 1)
.reverse());
} else {
// workaround for "rotation" at from `index` `r` to `index` `0`
// the chart does not actually use the previous permutation here,
// but rather, the first permutation of that particular "column";
// here, using `r` `,i`, `len`, would be
// `res[i - (i - 1) % (total / len)]`
var curr = prev.slice();
// this may be useful, to retrieve `r`,
// `prev` without item at `r` `index`
curr.splice(prev.indexOf(next[0]), 1);
// this is not optiomal
curr.sort(function(a, b) {
return arr.indexOf(a) > arr.indexOf(b)
});
// place `next[0]` at `index` `0`
// place remainder of sorted array at `index` `1` - n
curr.splice(0, 0, next[0])
res[i] = curr
}
idx = reset;
} else {
if (i % 2) {
// odd
res[i] = prev.slice(0, len - 2).concat(prev.slice(-2)
.reverse())
} else {
// even
--idx
res[i] = prev.slice(0, len - (len - 1))
.concat(prev.slice(idx), prev.slice(1, len + (idx)))
}
}
}
// try with `arr` : `[1,2,3,4,5]` to return `res` that is not correct;
// how can above `js` be adjusted to return correct results for `[1,2,3,4,5]` ?
console.log(res, res.length)
Resources:
Generating Permutation with Javascript
(Countdown) QuickPerm Head Lexicography:
(Formally Example_03 ~ Palindromes)
Generating all Permutations [non-recursive]
(Attempt to port to from C++ to javascript jsfiddle http://jsfiddle.net/tvvvjf3p/)
Calculating Permutation without Recursion - Part 2
permutations of a string using iteration
iterative-permutation
Permutations by swapping
Evaluation of permutation algorithms
Permutation algorithm without recursion? Java
Non-recursive algorithm for full permutation with repetitive elements?
String permutations in Java (non-recursive)
Generating permutations lazily
How to generate all permutations of a list in Python
Can all permutations of a set or string be generated in O(n log n) time?
Finding the nth lexicographic permutation of ‘0123456789’
Combinations and Permutations

Here is a simple solution to compute the nth permutation of a string:
function string_nth_permutation(str, n) {
var len = str.length, i, f, res;
for (f = i = 1; i <= len; i++)
f *= i;
if (n >= 0 && n < f) {
for (res = ""; len > 0; len--) {
f /= len;
i = Math.floor(n / f);
n %= f;
res += str.charAt(i);
str = str.substring(0, i) + str.substring(i + 1);
}
}
return res;
}
The algorithm follows these simple steps:
first compute f = len!, there are factorial(len) total permutations of a set of len different elements.
as the first element, divide the permutation number by (len-1)! and chose the element at the resulting offset. There are (len-1)! different permutations that have any given element as their first element.
remove the chosen element from the set and use the remainder of the division as the permutation number to keep going.
perform these steps with the rest of the set, whose length is reduced by one.
This algorithm is very simple and has interesting properties:
It computes the n-th permutation directly.
If the set is ordered, the permutations are generated in lexicographical order.
It works even if set elements cannot be compared to one another, such as objects, arrays, functions...
Permutation number 0 is the set in the order given.
Permutation number factorial(a.length)-1 is the last one: the set a in reverse order.
Permutations outside this range are returned as undefined.
It can easily be converted to handle a set stored as an array:
function array_nth_permutation(a, n) {
var b = a.slice(); // copy of the set
var len = a.length; // length of the set
var res; // return value, undefined
var i, f;
// compute f = factorial(len)
for (f = i = 1; i <= len; i++)
f *= i;
// if the permutation number is within range
if (n >= 0 && n < f) {
// start with the empty set, loop for len elements
for (res = []; len > 0; len--) {
// determine the next element:
// there are f/len subsets for each possible element,
f /= len;
// a simple division gives the leading element index
i = Math.floor(n / f);
// alternately: i = (n - n % f) / f;
res.push(b.splice(i, 1)[0]);
// reduce n for the remaining subset:
// compute the remainder of the above division
n %= f;
// extract the i-th element from b and push it at the end of res
}
}
// return the permutated set or undefined if n is out of range
return res;
}
clarification:
f is first computed as factorial(len).
For each step, f is divided by len, giving exacty the previous factorial.
n divided by this new value of f gives the slot number among the len slots that have the same initial element. Javascript does not have integral division, we could use (n / f) ... 0) to convert the result of the division to its integral part but it introduces a limitation to sets of 12 elements. Math.floor(n / f) allows for sets of up to 18 elements. We could also use (n - n % f) / f, probably more efficient too.
n must be reduced to the permutation number within this slot, that is the remainder of the division n / f.
We could use i differently in the second loop, storing the division remainder, avoiding Math.floor() and the extra % operator. Here is an alternative for this loop that may be even less readable:
// start with the empty set, loop for len elements
for (res = []; len > 0; len--) {
i = n % (f /= len);
res.push(b.splice((n - i) / f, 1)[0]);
n = i;
}

I think this post should help you. The algorithm should be easily translatable to JavaScript (I think it is more than 70% already JavaScript-compatible).
slice and reverse are bad calls to use if you are after efficiency. The algorithm described in the post is following the most efficient implementation of the next_permutation function, that is even integrated in some programming languages (like C++ e.g.)
EDIT
As I iterated over the algorithm once again I think you can just remove the types of the variables and you should be good to go in JavaScript.
EDIT
JavaScript version:
function nextPermutation(array) {
// Find non-increasing suffix
var i = array.length - 1;
while (i > 0 && array[i - 1] >= array[i])
i--;
if (i <= 0)
return false;
// Find successor to pivot
var j = array.length - 1;
while (array[j] <= array[i - 1])
j--;
var temp = array[i - 1];
array[i - 1] = array[j];
array[j] = temp;
// Reverse suffix
j = array.length - 1;
while (i < j) {
temp = array[i];
array[i] = array[j];
array[j] = temp;
i++;
j--;
}
return true;
}

One method to create permutations is by adding each element in all of the spaces between elements in all of the results so far. This can be done without recursion using loops and a queue.
JavaScript code:
function ps(a){
var res = [[]];
for (var i=0; i<a.length; i++){
while(res[res.length-1].length == i){
var l = res.pop();
for (var j=0; j<=l.length; j++){
var copy = l.slice();
copy.splice(j,0,a[i]);
res.unshift(copy);
}
}
}
return res;
}
console.log(JSON.stringify(ps(['a','b','c','d'])));

Here could be another solution, inspired from the Steinhaus-Johnson-Trotter algorithm:
function p(input) {
var i, j, k, temp, base, current, outputs = [[input[0]]];
for (i = 1; i < input.length; i++) {
current = [];
for (j = 0; j < outputs.length; j++) {
base = outputs[j];
for (k = 0; k <= base.length; k++) {
temp = base.slice();
temp.splice(k, 0, input[i]);
current.push(temp);
}
}
outputs = current;
}
return outputs;
}
// call
var outputs = p(["a", "b", "c", "d"]);
for (var i = 0; i < outputs.length; i++) {
document.write(JSON.stringify(outputs[i]) + "<br />");
}

Here's a snippet for an approach that I came up with on my own, but naturally was also able to find it described elsewhere:
generatePermutations = function(arr) {
if (arr.length < 2) {
return arr.slice();
}
var factorial = [1];
for (var i = 1; i <= arr.length; i++) {
factorial.push(factorial[factorial.length - 1] * i);
}
var allPerms = [];
for (var permNumber = 0; permNumber < factorial[factorial.length - 1]; permNumber++) {
var unused = arr.slice();
var nextPerm = [];
while (unused.length) {
var nextIndex = Math.floor((permNumber % factorial[unused.length]) / factorial[unused.length - 1]);
nextPerm.push(unused[nextIndex]);
unused.splice(nextIndex, 1);
}
allPerms.push(nextPerm);
}
return allPerms;
};
Enter comma-separated string (e.g. a,b,c):
<br/>
<input id="arrInput" type="text" />
<br/>
<button onclick="perms.innerHTML = generatePermutations(arrInput.value.split(',')).join('<br/>')">
Generate permutations
</button>
<br/>
<div id="perms"></div>
Explanation
Since there are factorial(arr.length) permutations for a given array arr, each number between 0 and factorial(arr.length)-1 encodes a particular permutation. To unencode a permutation number, repeatedly remove elements from arr until there are no elements left. The exact index of which element to remove is given by the formula (permNumber % factorial(arr.length)) / factorial(arr.length-1). Other formulas could be used to determine the index to remove, as long as it preserves the one-to-one mapping between number and permutation.
Example
The following is how all permutations would be generated for the array (a,b,c,d):
# Perm 1st El 2nd El 3rd El 4th El
0 abcd (a,b,c,d)[0] (b,c,d)[0] (c,d)[0] (d)[0]
1 abdc (a,b,c,d)[0] (b,c,d)[0] (c,d)[1] (c)[0]
2 acbd (a,b,c,d)[0] (b,c,d)[1] (b,d)[0] (d)[0]
3 acdb (a,b,c,d)[0] (b,c,d)[1] (b,d)[1] (b)[0]
4 adbc (a,b,c,d)[0] (b,c,d)[2] (b,c)[0] (c)[0]
5 adcb (a,b,c,d)[0] (b,c,d)[2] (b,c)[1] (b)[0]
6 bacd (a,b,c,d)[1] (a,c,d)[0] (c,d)[0] (d)[0]
7 badc (a,b,c,d)[1] (a,c,d)[0] (c,d)[1] (c)[0]
8 bcad (a,b,c,d)[1] (a,c,d)[1] (a,d)[0] (d)[0]
9 bcda (a,b,c,d)[1] (a,c,d)[1] (a,d)[1] (a)[0]
10 bdac (a,b,c,d)[1] (a,c,d)[2] (a,c)[0] (c)[0]
11 bdca (a,b,c,d)[1] (a,c,d)[2] (a,c)[1] (a)[0]
12 cabd (a,b,c,d)[2] (a,b,d)[0] (b,d)[0] (d)[0]
13 cadb (a,b,c,d)[2] (a,b,d)[0] (b,d)[1] (b)[0]
14 cbad (a,b,c,d)[2] (a,b,d)[1] (a,d)[0] (d)[0]
15 cbda (a,b,c,d)[2] (a,b,d)[1] (a,d)[1] (a)[0]
16 cdab (a,b,c,d)[2] (a,b,d)[2] (a,b)[0] (b)[0]
17 cdba (a,b,c,d)[2] (a,b,d)[2] (a,b)[1] (a)[0]
18 dabc (a,b,c,d)[3] (a,b,c)[0] (b,c)[0] (c)[0]
19 dacb (a,b,c,d)[3] (a,b,c)[0] (b,c)[1] (b)[0]
20 dbac (a,b,c,d)[3] (a,b,c)[1] (a,c)[0] (c)[0]
21 dbca (a,b,c,d)[3] (a,b,c)[1] (a,c)[1] (a)[0]
22 dcab (a,b,c,d)[3] (a,b,c)[2] (a,b)[0] (b)[0]
23 dcba (a,b,c,d)[3] (a,b,c)[2] (a,b)[1] (a)[0]
Note that each permutation # is of the form:
(firstElIndex * 3!) + (secondElIndex * 2!) + (thirdElIndex * 1!) + (fourthElIndex * 0!)
which is basically the reverse process of the formula given in the explanation.

I dare to add another answer, aiming at answering you question regarding slice, concat, reverse.
The answer is it is possible (almost), but it would not be quite effective. What you are doing in your algorithm is the following:
Find the first inversion in the permutation array, right-to-left (inversion in this case defined as i and j where i < j and perm[i] > perm[j], indices given left-to-right)
place the bigger number of the inversion
concatenate the processed numbers in reversed order, which will be the same as sorted order, as no inversions were observed.
concatenate the second number of the inversion (still sorted in accordsnce with the previos number, as no inversions were observed)
This is mainly, what my first answer does, but in a bit more optimal manner.
Example
Consider the permutation 9,10, 11, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4 ,3,2,1
The first inversion right-to-left is 10, 11.
And really the next permutation is:
9,11,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10=9concat(11)concat(rev(8,7,6,5,4,3,2,1))concat(10)
Source code
Here I include the source code as I envision it:
var nextPermutation = function(arr) {
for (var i = arr.length - 2; i >= 0; i--) {
if (arr[i] < arr[i + 1]) {
return arr.slice(0, i).concat([arr[i + 1]]).concat(arr.slice(i + 2).reverse()).concat([arr[i]]);
}
}
// return again the first permutation if calling next permutation on last.
return arr.reverse();
}
console.log(nextPermutation([9, 10, 11, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1]));
console.log(nextPermutation([6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1]));
console.log(nextPermutation([1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6]));
The code is avaiable for jsfiddle here.

A fairly simple C++ code without recursion.
#include <vector>
#include <algorithm>
#include <iterator>
#include <iostream>
#include <string>
// Integer data
void print_all_permutations(std::vector<int> &data) {
std::stable_sort(std::begin(data), std::end(data));
do {
std::copy(data.begin(), data.end(), std::ostream_iterator<int>(std::cout, " ")), std::cout << '\n';
} while (std::next_permutation(std::begin(data), std::end(data)));
}
// Character data (string)
void print_all_permutations(std::string &data) {
std::stable_sort(std::begin(data), std::end(data));
do {
std::copy(data.begin(), data.end(), std::ostream_iterator<char>(std::cout, " ")), std::cout << '\n';
} while (std::next_permutation(std::begin(data), std::end(data)));
}
int main()
{
std::vector<int> v({1,2,3,4});
print_all_permutations(v);
std::string s("abcd");
print_all_permutations(s);
return 0;
}
We can find next permutation of a sequence in linear time.

Here is an answer from #le_m. It might be of help.
The following very efficient algorithm uses Heap's method to generate all permutations of N elements with runtime complexity in O(N!):
function permute(permutation) {
var length = permutation.length,
result = [permutation.slice()],
c = new Array(length).fill(0),
i = 1, k, p;
while (i < length) {
if (c[i] < i) {
k = i % 2 && c[i];
p = permutation[i];
permutation[i] = permutation[k];
permutation[k] = p;
++c[i];
i = 1;
result.push(permutation.slice());
} else {
c[i] = 0;
++i;
}
}
return result;
}
console.log(JSON.stringify(permute([1, 2, 3, 4])));

You can use a stack to go through permutations.
This approach is ideal when dealing with trees or other problems while not leaning on recursion.
You will need to make adjustments to not have any duplicate values.
type permutation = [string, string[]]
function p(str: string): string[]{
const res: string[] = []
const stack: permutation[] = [["", str.split('')]]
while(stack.length){
const [head, tail] = stack.pop()
if(!tail.length){
res.push(head)
continue
}
for(let i = 0; i < tail.length; i++){
let newTail = tail.slice()
newTail.splice(i, 1)
stack.push([head + tail[i], newTail])
}
}
return res
}

Summation\ Addition of two arrays (particular)

"A positive number of whatever length is represented as an array of numerical characters, ergo between '0's and '9's. We know that the most significant cypher is in position of index 0 of the array.
Example:
- Number is 10282
- Array will be number = [1,0,2,8,2]
This considered, create a function of 2 arrays representing two positive numbers that calculates the SUM\ADDITION\SUMMATION of both of them and set it in a third array, containing the sum of the first 2."
This is how the exercise is translated from my own language, italian.
This is my solution but it doesnt entirely work. I have tried with basic stuff like
A=[1,4] and B=[4,7]. The results should be C=[6,1] but it gives me [5,1] as it considers the line where I use the modular but not the one where I say that the -1 index position should take a ++.
Help <3
alert('Insert A length');
var k=asknum();
alert('Insert B length');
var h=asknum();
var A = new Array(k);
var B = new Array(h);
// asknum() is only defined in this particular environment we are
// using at the university. I guess the turnaround would be -prompt-
function readVet(vet){//inserts values in index positions
for(i=0;i<vet.length;i++)
vet[i]=asknum();
}
readVet(A);//fills array
readVet(B);//fills array
function sumArray(vet1,vet2){
var C = new Array();
for(i=vet1.length-1;i>(-1);i--){
for(n=vet2.length-1;n>(-1);n--){
C[i]=vet1[i]+vet2[i];
if(C[i]>9){
C[i]=C[i]%10;
C[i-1]=C[i-1]++;
}
}
}
return C;
}
print(sumArray(A,B));

I'm not sure what you're doing with a nested for loop here. You just need one. Also, to make said loop really simple, normalize the arrays first so that both are the length of the larger array + 1 element (in case of carry). Then correct the result on the way out of the function.
function normalizeArray(array, digits) {
var zeroCnt = digits - array.length,
zeroes = [];
while (zeroCnt--) {
zeroes.push(0);
}
return zeroes.concat(array);
}
function sumArrays(a1, a2) {
var maxResultLength = Math.max(a1.length, a2.length) + 1;
a1 = normalizeArray(a1, maxResultLength);
a2 = normalizeArray(a2, maxResultLength);
var result = normalizeArray([], maxResultLength);
var i = maxResultLength - 1, // working index
digit = 0, // working result digit
c = 0; // carry (0 or 1)
while (i >= 0) {
digit = a1[i] + a2[i] + c;
if (digit > 9) {
c = 1;
digit -= 10;
} else {
c = 0;
}
result[i--] = digit;
}
/* If there was no carry into the most significant digit, chop off the extra 0 */
/* If the caller gave us arrays with a bunch of leading zeroes, chop those off */
/* but don't be an idiot and slice for every digit like sqykly =D */
for (i = 0 ; i < result.length && result[i] === 0 ; i++) {
/* result = result.slice(1); don't do that, or anything */
}
return result.slice(i);
}
That gives the expected output.

I may be missing something because the other answers look much more complicated, but here's my attempt at providing an answer based on the question:
// Takes an array and generates the sum of the elements
function addArrayNumbers(arr) {
return arr.reduce(function (p, c) {
return String(p) + String(c);
});
}
// Sums two numbers and returns an array based on that sum
function addCombinedNumbers(a, b) {
return String(Number(a) + Number(b)).split('');
}
var arrone = [1, 4];
var arrtwo = [4, 7];
var one = addArrayNumbers(arrone);
var two = addArrayNumbers(arrtwo);
var c = addCombinedNumbers(one, two); // [6,1]
Fiddle

I followed a different approach that may very well be less efficient than yours, but i consider it to be much clearer. One important thing is that i reverse the arrays so the least significant bit is first. Comments are in the code.
function sum(a,b){
// ensure a is the largest of the two arrays
if (a.length < b.length)
return sum(b,a);
// flip the arrays so the least significant digit is first
a = a.reverse();
b = b.reverse();
// c will hold the result (reversed at first)
var c = [];
// add each number individually
var carry = a.reduce(function(carry,digitA,index){
// digitA is guaranteed to be a number, digit from b is not!
var sum = digitA + (b[index] || 0) + carry;
c.push(sum%10);
return Math.floor(sum/10); // this is carried to the next step of the addition
},0); // initial carry is 0
if (carry) c.push(1); // resolve if carry exists after all digits have been added
return c.reverse();
}
// Usage:
console.log(sum([1,0,8,3],[1,3,5])); // [1, 2, 1, 8]
console.log(sum([8,3],[7,9])); // [1, 6, 2]
PS: There are many problems with your code. For one, you cannot use two nested loops:
var a = [0,1];
var b = [2,3];
for (var i=0; i<a.length; i++) {
for (var j=0; j<b.length; j++) {
console.log(a[i] + ' ' + b[i]);
}
}
// will output: 0 2, 0 3, 1 2, 1 3
// you want something along the lines of: 0 2, 1 3
What you want is a single loop that iterates over both arrays simultaneously.
My attempt at an efficient solution:
function efficientSum(a,b){
var i = a.length, j = b.length;
if (i<j) return efficientSum(j,i);
var q = 0, c = [];
c.length = i;
while (i) {
c[--i] = a[i] + (b[--j] || 0) + q;
q = c[i] > 9 ? ((c[i]-=10),1) : 0; // comma operator, ugly!
}
if (q) c.unshift(1);
return c;
}