Related
The structure I have for my firebase database is like this:
fruits:
apple,5
banana,6
I want to put apple and banana in an array so that when i give a command to Google Assistant, it would give me apple, 5 and banana, 6. The code I have is like the one below:
function handleCommand(agent) {
return admin.database().ref('Fruits').child().once("value").then((snapshot) =>{
var i;
var fruitlist=[];
//puts each snapshot child of 'Fruit' in an array
snapshot.forEach(function(item) {
var itemVal = item.val();
fruitlist.push(itemVal);
});
//outputs command in google assistant
for (i=0; i < fruitlist.length; i++) {
agent.add(fruitlist[i]);
}
})
The default response is "not available".
I get the following in the execution logs:
Firebase.child failed. Was called 0 aruguments. expects at least 1.
I do not know which argument to put inside the Firebase.child. if i want all fruits to be "spoken" by Google Assistant. Below is a picture of my firebase structure.
The error looks like the one below:
What I am currently doing now to just output the fruits are manually entering each child in the code like this and removed the ".child" in the return statement:
Which gives me the output below which is also what I want to see but using arrays as the solution I am using now is very much hardcoded:
As the error message suggests, and as you surmise, the child() call expects a parameter - in particular, the name of the child node you want to get information from. However, since you want all the children of the "Fruits" node - you don't need to specify it at all. The child() call just navigates down through the hierarchy, but you don't need to navigate at all if you don't want to.
The snapshot you get back will have a value of the entire object. In some cases, this can be pretty large, so it isn't a good idea to get it all at once. In your case, it is fairly small, so not as big a deal.
On the JavaScript side, you can now handle that value as an object with attributes and values. Your original code didn't quite do what you said you want it to, however - you're getting the value, but ignoring the name (which is the attribute name or key). You can iterate over the attributes of an object in a number of ways, but I like getting the keys of the object, looping over this, getting the value associated with the key, and then "doing something" with it.
While I haven't tested the code, it might look something like this:
function handleCommand(agent) {
return admin.database().ref('Fruits').once("value").then((snapshot) =>{
// Get an object with all the fruits and values
var fruits = snapshot.val();
// Get the keys for the attributes of this object as an array
var keys = Object.keys( fruits );
// Iterate over the keys, get the associated value, and do something with it
for( var i=0; i<keys.length; i++ ){
var key = keys[i];
var val = fruits[key];
agent.add( `The number of ${key} you have are: ${val}` );
}
})
While this is (or should be) working Firebase and JavaScript, there are a couple of problems with this on the Actions on Google side.
First, the message returned might have some grammar problems, so using your example, you may see a message such as "The number of Apple you have are: 1". There are ways to resolve this, but keep in mind my sample code is just a starter sample.
More significantly, however, the call to agent.add() with a string creates a "SimpleResponse". You're only allowed two simple responses per reply in an Action. So while this will work for your example, it will have problems if you have more fruit. You can solve this by concatenating the strings together so you're only calling agent.add() once.
Finally, you may wish to actually look at some of the other response options for different surfaces. So while you might read out this list on a speaker, you may read a shorter list on a device with a screen and show a table with the information. Details about these might be better addressed as a new StackOverflow question, however.
I have the the following data being returned by my api.
[{"category":"Amazon","month":"Feb","total":9.75},
{"category":"Amazon","month":"Mar","total":169.44},
{"category":"Amazon","month":"Apr","total":10.69},
{"category":"Amazon","month":"May","total":867.0600000000001},
{"category":"Amazon","month":"Jun","total":394.43999999999994},
{"category":"Amazon","month":"Jul","total":787.2400000000001},
{"category":"Amazon","month":"Aug","total":1112.4400000000003},
{"category":"Amazon","month":"Sep","total":232.86999999999998},
{"category":"Amazon","month":"Oct","total":222.26999999999998},
{"category":"Amazon","month":"Nov","total":306.09999999999997},
{"category":"Amazon","month":"Dec","total":1096.2599999999998}]
I want to format it so that the months are all grouped under each category like this:
[{"category":"Amazon","month":{"Jan":9.75,"Feb":9.75,"Mar":9.75,"Apr":9.75,etc...}]
How can I do this with javascript?
What I'm ultimately trying to do is to display some pivoted data in a table. I'm not sure what the best design is to accomplish this.
Right now, I'm just setting up a table dynamically and adding in the data corresponding to each row. Are there better design patterns for doing this?
You can reduce the array of objects to an object using the categories as keys, and adding the months, and then map it back to an array again
var arr = [{"category":"Amazon","month":"Feb","total":9.75},
{"category":"Amazon","month":"Mar","total":169.44},
{"category":"Amazon","month":"Apr","total":10.69},
{"category":"Amazon","month":"May","total":867.0600000000001},
{"category":"Amazon","month":"Jun","total":394.43999999999994},
{"category":"Amazon","month":"Jul","total":787.2400000000001},
{"category":"Amazon","month":"Aug","total":1112.4400000000003},
{"category":"Amazon","month":"Sep","total":232.86999999999998},
{"category":"Amazon","month":"Oct","total":222.26999999999998},
{"category":"Amazon","month":"Nov","total":306.09999999999997},
{"category":"Amazon","month":"Dec","total":1096.2599999999998}];
var o = arr.reduce( (a,b) => {
a[b.category] = a[b.category] || [];
a[b.category].push({[b.month]:b.total});
return a;
}, {});
var a = Object.keys(o).map(function(k) {
return {category : k, month : Object.assign.apply({},o[k])};
});
console.log(a);
I would take the following approach:
Write down on a piece of paper how to solve the problem (the "algorithm").
Flesh out this algorithm with more details. Sometimes this is called "pseudo-code".
Convert the pseudo-code into JavaScript.
For instance, your algorithm might look like this:
Create a new thing to hold the results.
Loop through the elements in the input.
For each element in the input, update the results thing.
Return the result.
Sometimes it helps to read out the algorithm aloud to yourself. Or animate the algorithm on a blackboard. Or talk through the algorithm with someone nearby.
The pseudo-code might be:
Create a new array containing a new object to hold the results, with a category property set to "Amazon", and a months property set to an empty object.
Loop through the elements in the input array.
For each element, add a new property to the months property of the results object, whose key is the value of the month property from the element, and whose value is the value of the total property from the element.
Return the result.
If you have specific questions about any of those steps, you can research it further, or ask, such as:
How do I create a new array, with an object inside?
How do I loop through the elements of an array?
How do I retrieve a property from an object?
How do I add a new key/value pair to an object?
How do I return the result?
If you are unfamiliar with any of the terms used above--such as array, object, property, key, value, or element--research them and make sure you know what they mean. Knowing and using correct terminology is the first step to successful programming!
When converting your algorithm into JS, write it step by step, and test it at each phase. For instance, start with a version which doesn't loop over the input at all, and make sure it produces a correct output of [{category: "Amazon", month: {}}]. Walk though your code in the debugger at this and each following step--if you don't know how to use the debugger, learning that should be your first priority! If you want to check a little bit of syntax, to make sure it does what you think, just try it out by typing it into the console. If you don't know what the console is, learning that should be another top priority.
All the above assumes that you've got a single Amazon category. If you are going to have multiple categories, and want multiple objects (one for each) in your output array, then start over from the top and write the algorithm and pseudo-code which can handle that.
I need a high performance map in Javascript (hashmap or whatever) that maps int(s) to string(s). The map would be used to build some sections of the webpage after dom is ready. I know simple javascript object also works like a map but I need to work with best performance.
I would like to initialize the map with all data pairs just at once by appending a string to the webpage while generating the response page from server.
Any ways how to improve performance of javascript map for int- string pairs or are there any implementations for the same ?
--
Using jQuery 1.7
Ok, I'll post it here since it's more of an answer:
Use an array. Taken into account that any implementation will have to use js primitives and objects, you'll be hard pressed to find something more performant than that.
Arrays in most (all?) implementations of javascript can be sparse. So array.length will return the index of last element + 1, but in sparse case the array will not have all elements allocated and will use object property semantics to access it's elements (meaning, it's effectively a hashtable with ints as keys).
It basically gives you the behavior you're looking for.
In case of negative ints, use a second array.
In relation to a single statement initialization: you can't do it in general, since it bases itself on implicitly knowing the item index.
What you can do is to append something along the lines:
var arr = [];
arr[int1] = val1;
arr[int2] = val2;
arr[int3] = val3;
arr[int4] = val4;
...
arr[intn] = valn;
I mean you have to list (Number, String) pairs somehow anyway.
Please check out this jperf test case, and draw your conclusion.
Objects are also sparse. Arrays are simply specialized objects that account for their own length among other things.
I think you should use the following
var l_map = {};
to add an element use
l_map[<your integer>] = <your string>
and to retrieve is
var l_value = l_map[<your integer>];
This is one way to solve your problem.
The second way is quite simple just use an array (or list) because it stores the values based on position as follows:
var l_array = [];
to add element at the last use : l_array.push(<your string>);
to add element at a specified position : l_array.splice(<position>,0,<your string>);
and to retrieve use : l_array[<posit>];
I need to implement a simple way to handle localization about weekdays' names, and I came up with the following structure:
var weekdaysLegend=new Array(
{'it-it':'Lunedì', 'en-us':'Monday'},
{'it-it':'Martedì', 'en-us':'Tuesday'},
{'it-it':'Mercoledì', 'en-us':'Wednesday'},
{'it-it':'Giovedì', 'en-us':'Thursday'},
{'it-it':'Venerdì', 'en-us':'Friday'},
{'it-it':'Sabato', 'en-us':'Saturday'},
{'it-it':'Domenica', 'en-us':'Sunday'}
);
I know I could implement something like an associative array (given the fact that I know that javascript does not provide associative arrays but objects with similar structure), but i need to iterate through the array using numeric indexes instead of labels.
So, I would like to handle this in a for cycle with particular values (like j-1 or indexes like that).
Is my structure correct? Provided a variable "lang" as one of the value between "it-it" or "en-us", I tried to print weekdaysLegend[j-1][lang] (or weekdaysLegend[j-1].lang, I think I tried everything!) but the results is [object Object]. Obviously I'm missing something..
Any idea?
The structure looks fine. You should be able to access values by:
weekdaysLegend[0]["en-us"]; // returns Monday
Of course this will also work for values in variables such as:
weekdaysLegend[i][lang];
for (var i = 0; i < weekdaysLegend.length; i++) {
alert(weekdaysLegend[i]["en-us"]);
}
This will alert the days of the week.
Sounds like you're doing everything correctly and the structure works for me as well.
Just a small note (I see the answer is already marked) as I am currently designing on a large application where I want to put locals into a javascript array.
Assumption: 1000 words x4 languages generates 'xx-xx' + the word itself...
Thats 1000 rows pr. language + the same 7 chars used for language alone = wasted bandwitdh...
the client/browser will have to PARSE THEM ALL before it can do any lookup in the arrays at all.
here is my approach:
Why not generate the javascript for one language at a time, if the user selects another language, just respond(send) the right javascript to the browser to include?
Either store a separate javascript with large array for each language OR use the language as parametre to the server-side script aka:
If the language file changes a lot or you need to minimize it per user/module, then its quite archivable with this approach as you can just add an extra parametre for "which part/module" to generate or a timestamp so the cache of the javascript file will work until changes occures.
if the dynamic approach is too performance heavy for the webserver, then publish/generate the files everytime there is a change/added a new locale - all you'll need is the "language linker" check in the top of the page, to check which language file to server the browser.
Conclusion
This approach will remove the overhead of a LOT of repeating "language" ID's if the locales list grows large.
You have to access an index from the array, and then a value by specifying a key from the object.
This works just fine for me: http://jsfiddle.net/98Sda/.
var day = 2;
var lang = 'en-us';
var weekdaysLegend = [
{'it-it':'Lunedì', 'en-us':'Monday'},
{'it-it':'Martedì', 'en-us':'Tuesday'},
{'it-it':'Mercoledì', 'en-us':'Wednesday'},
{'it-it':'Giovedì', 'en-us':'Thursday'},
{'it-it':'Venerdì', 'en-us':'Friday'},
{'it-it':'Sabato', 'en-us':'Saturday'},
{'it-it':'Domenica', 'en-us':'Sunday'}
];
alert(weekdaysLegend[day][lang]);
I'm using Jorn Zaefferer's Autocomplete plugin on a couple of different pages. In both instances, the order of displayed strings is a little bit messed up.
Example 1: array of strings: basically they are in alphabetical order except for General Knowledge which has been pushed to the top:
General Knowledge,Art and Design,Business Studies,Citizenship,Design and Technology,English,Geography,History,ICT,Mathematics,MFL French,MFL German,MFL Spanish,Music,Physical Education,PSHE,Religious Education,Science,Something Else
Displayed strings:
General Knowledge,Geography,Art and Design,Business Studies,Citizenship,Design and Technology,English,History,ICT,Mathematics,MFL French,MFL German,MFL Spanish,Music,Physical Education,PSHE,Religious Education,Science,Something Else
Note that Geography has been pushed to be the second item, after General Knowledge. The rest are all fine.
Example 2: array of strings: as above but with Cross-curricular instead of General Knowledge.
Cross-curricular,Art and Design,Business Studies,Citizenship,Design and Technology,English,Geography,History,ICT,Mathematics,MFL French,MFL German,MFL Spanish,Music,Physical Education,PSHE,Religious Education,Science,Something Else
Displayed strings:
Cross-curricular,Citizenship,Art and Design,Business Studies,Design and Technology,English,Geography,History,ICT,Mathematics,MFL French,MFL German,MFL Spanish,Music,Physical Education,PSHE,Religious Education,Science,Something Else
Here, Citizenship has been pushed to the number 2 position.
I've experimented a little, and it seems like there's a bug saying "put things that start with the same letter as the first item after the first item and leave the rest alone". Kind of mystifying. I've tried a bit of debugging by triggering alerts inside the autocomplete plugin code but everywhere i can see, it's using the correct order. it seems to be just when its rendered out that it goes wrong.
Any ideas anyone?
max
EDIT - reply to Clint
Thanks for pointing me at the relevant bit of code btw. To make diagnosis simpler i changed the array of values to ["carrot", "apple", "cherry"], which autocomplete re-orders to ["carrot", "cherry", "apple"].
Here's the array that it generates for stMatchSets:
stMatchSets = ({'':[#1={value:"carrot", data:["carrot"], result:"carrot"}, #3={value:"apple", data:["apple"], result:"apple"}, #2={value:"cherry", data:["cherry"], result:"cherry"}], c:[#1#, #2#], a:[#3#]})
So, it's collecting the first letters together into a map, which makes sense as a first-pass matching strategy. What i'd like it to do though, is to use the given array of values, rather than the map, when it comes to populating the displayed list. I can't quite get my head around what's going on with the cache inside the guts of the code (i'm not very experienced with javascript).
SOLVED - i fixed this by hacking the javascript in the plugin.
On line 549 (or 565) we return a variable csub which is an object holding the matching data. Before it's returned, I reorder this so that the order matches the original array of value we were given, ie that we used to build the index in the first place, which i had put into another variable:
csub = csub.sort(function(a,b){ return originalData.indexOf(a.value) > originalData.indexOf(b.value); })
hacky but it works. Personally i think that this behaviour (possibly coded more cleanly) should be the default behaviour of the plugin: ie, the order of results should match the original passed array of possible values. That way the user can sort their array alphabetically if they want (which is trivial) to get the results in alphabetical order, or they can preserve their own 'custom' order.
What I did instead of your solution was to add
if (!q && data[q]){return data[q];}
just above
var csub = [];
found in line ~535.
What this does, if I understood correctly, is to fetch the cached data for when the input is empty, specified in line ~472: stMatchSets[""] = []. Assuming that the cached data for when the input is empty are the first data you provided to begin with, then its all good.
I'm not sure about this autocomplete plugin in particular, but are you sure it's not just trying to give you the best match possible? My autocomplete plugin does some heuristics and does reordering of that nature.
Which brings me to my other answer: there are a million jQuery autocomplete plugins out there. If this one doesn't satisfy you, I'm sure there is another that will.
edit:
In fact, I'm completely certain that's what it's doing. Take a look around line 474:
// loop through the array and create a lookup structure
for ( var i = 0, ol = options.data.length; i < ol; i++ ) {
/* some code */
var firstChar = value.charAt(0).toLowerCase();
// if no lookup array for this character exists, look it up now
if( !stMatchSets[firstChar] )
and so on. So, it's a feature.