I'm relatively new to customizing Google sheets and only learning javascript.
I'm trying to create a custom function that will search for a value in an array and return a string (something like vlookup).
What I'm trying to achieve is to get the value checked against multiple arrays. I wrote the below but for some reason, it checks only first element of the array (it did work but stopped for some reason and I cannot figure out why as I don't think I changed anything).
The second part will be trickier still, how to make it work against multiple arrays... I was thinking to create an array:
depots = [depot1,depot2...] and then change the code to "depots.length in for loop but even 1 array proves to be problematic.
var depot1 = ["device1", "device2", "device3"];
var depot1 = ["device1", "device2", "device3"];
function _depot(value) {
if (value) {
var depotCheckCase = value.toUpperCase();
for (var i = 0; i < depot1.length; i++) {
if (depotCheckCase == depot1[i]) {
return "Depot 1";
} else {
return false;
}
}
}
}
It only checks the first entry because you have return in both branches of your if/else, so no matter what, the first loop iteration will terminate the function.
Instead, move the return false; to the end, outside of the loop.
A couple of other issues:
You're declaring the same variable twice. Your second var depot1 = ... ends up being just an assignment (but since the array it's assigning has the same entries as the first one, you may not notice).
You're forcing the value to check to upper case, but not doing the same to the entry you're checking against.
Addressing all of those:
var depot1 = ["device1", "device2", "device3"];
function _depot(value) {
if (value) {
var depotCheckCase = value.toUpperCase();
for (var i = 0; i < depot1.length; i++) {
if (depotCheckCase == depot1[i].toUpperCase()) {
return "Depot 1";
}
}
return false;
}
}
console.log(_depot("device2")); // "Depot 1"
console.log(_depot("device8")); // false
Any idea how can I combine it with checking against second/third array?
You have two options:
Additional loops (simplest).
Finding the length of the longest array, using that as the loop max, and checking against undefined before comparing. Since [n] on an array when n is greater than or equal to the length will give you undefined, you can check that before doing the toUpperCase.
Here's that second one:
var depot1 = ["device1", "device2", "device3"];
var depot2 = ["device4", "device5"];
var depot3 = ["device6", "device7", "device8", "device9"];
function _depot(value) {
if (value) {
var depotCheckCase = value.toUpperCase();
var max = Math.max(depot1.length, depot2.length, depot3.length);
var entry;
for (var i = 0; i < max; i++) {
entry = depot1[i];
if (entry !== undefined && depotCheckCase === entry.toUpperCase()) {
return "Depot 1";
}
entry = depot2[i];
if (entry !== undefined && depotCheckCase === entry.toUpperCase()) {
return "Depot 2";
}
entry = depot3[i];
if (entry !== undefined && depotCheckCase === entry.toUpperCase()) {
return "Depot 3";
}
}
return false;
}
}
console.log(_depot("device2")); // "Depot 1"
console.log(_depot("device8")); // "Depot 3"
console.log(_depot("device5")); // "Depot 2"
console.log(_depot("device10")); // false
You could give yourself an array of arrays and do that in a loop rather than repeating the logic. I leave that as an exercise for the reader. :-)
Related
I am trying to using a for loop for trying to validate the input of the user and this is the code i got.
function Valid() {
objfieldid = ["userMail", "userCont"]
objboxid = ["cancelMail", "cancelCont"]
return objfieldid.every(callnonvalid)
}
function callnonvalid(id) {
var valid = false
var objlength = objfieldid.length
objlength--;
for (var i = objlength; i >= 0; i--){
var cobj = document.getElementById(objboxid[i]).checked;
if (document.getElementById(id).value != "" ){
var obj = document.getElementById(id).value;
} else if (cobj == true) {
alert(i); //return 1, 1
return true
} else {
return false
}
}
}
As you can see, in the code, the for loop is running twice. but the i variable is left unchanged. Why would this happen?
btw, I did read different material about closure and i am sure there didnt got a closure problem
EDIT:guys please note that i did noticed the array is zero based, and i did minus the objlength by one.
Mistakes were found after checking the code carefully. The Mistake that I made was that I should not use the return for the out since that would stop the function from working, however that array.every Called the function twice which make the i not decreasing
I'm not sure why you're decrementing in your loop, because the performance gain would be infinitesimally small (it may even be slower, e.g. in Chrome/V8) and working in reverse order can get confusing further down the line, but that's your choice and I don't know enough about what you're doing to judge.
Either way, I don't think you'd want to decrement objlength before the loop begins as you are doing now. The whole point of a loop is to handle the incrementing/decrementing in the condition statement of the loop.
You would only decrement manually like that if you were going to move your if/else if/else statement into a closed over function and execute it recursively, decrementing the objlength from within the closure. Which would work, but it's unnecessarily complicated for what you're doing and you would gain nothing for rewriting the whole thing.
So, sticking with the looping approach, perhaps try either of these:
function Valid() {
objfieldid = ["userMail", "userCont"];
objboxid = ["cancelMail", "cancelCont"];
return objfieldid.every(callnonvalid);
}
function callnonvalid(id) {
var valid = false;
var objlength = objfieldid.length;
for(var i = 0; i < objlength; i++){
var cobj = document.getElementById(objboxid[i]).checked;
if (document.getElementById(id).value != "" ){
var obj = document.getElementById(id).value;
} else if (cobj == true) {
alert(i);
return true;
} else {
return false;
}
}
}
or, if you want to decrement, use while instead of for:
function Valid() {
objfieldid = ["userMail", "userCont"];
objboxid = ["cancelMail", "cancelCont"];
return objfieldid.every(callnonvalid);
}
function callnonvalid(id) {
var valid = false;
var i = objfieldid.length;
while(i--){
var cobj = document.getElementById(objboxid[i]).checked;
if (document.getElementById(id).value != "" ){
var obj = document.getElementById(id).value;
} else if (cobj == true) {
alert(i);
return true;
} else {
return false;
}
}
}
Because the array objboxid[] has only two elements, the first time through your loop objboxid[2] will be attempting to fetch an array index that is out-of-bounds.
You probably meant something like:
for (var i = objlength; i > 0; i--){
var cobj = document.getElementById(objboxid[i-1]).checked;
or perhaps
for (var i = objlength-1; i >= 0; i--){
var cobj = document.getElementById(objboxid[i]).checked;
I'm fairly new to JS and am still slightly confused, by the ordering and nesting of JS functions. I have a script that I want to occur in a specific way. The problem a criteria can be left blank by a user. Im trying to say if the variable length is greater than zero run the callback, but then move into the code that occurs under the next two if statements. I know there must be a more efficient method for this, but for the life of me I can't think of one besides placing all the other code under each different if/else statement.
var lst = []
var lst2 = []
var lst3 = []
alert(cityu);
alert(dateu);
alert(numberu);
d3.csv("kyle.csv", function (d) {
return {
city: d.from,
number: d.phone_number,
date: d.from_date
};
}, function (error, rows) {
if (dateu.length > 0) {
for (var i = 0; i < rows.length; i++) {
if (rows[i].date === dateu) {
lst.push(rows[i]);
console.log(rows[i]);
}
}
} else {
if (cityu.length > 0) {
for (var i = 0; i < lst.city.length; i++) {
if (lst.city[i] === cityu) {
lst2.push(lst[i]);
console.log(lst2);
}
}
} else {
if (numberu.length > 0) {
for (var i = 0; i < rows.length; i++) {
if (lst.number[i] === numberu) {
lst3.push(lst2[i]);
console.log(lst3);
}
}
}
}
}
})
};
Here you can see that if the dateu variable has length greater than zero the rows in a csv matching that user entered criteria will be pushed to the array "lst". Obviously it currently doesn't move into the next callback under, it will only do this if "dateu" equalled zero.
One other issue with my script is that at each if statement I hope to reduce my original input based on the user entered parameters. For example a user might enter "seattle" the variable "city" will now equal seattle and only rows containing Seattle as their city will be kept in the array that rows[i] is pushed to.
Every piece of user input shown here:
alert(cityu);
alert(dateu);
alert(numberu);
will have the same affect on the dataset, each time reducing the number of rows included.
The problem specifically is that each if statement relies on the array from the previous callback.
Your code redone a little - I've removed the else blocks, because you want to do each loop regardless of the previous loop
if(condition1) {
do something
}
else {
do something else
}
from that, if the first condition is met, the else block wont get executed
if(condition1) {
do something
}
if(condition2) {
do something else
}
In this case, do something else only relies on condition2 being true, consition1 is irrelevant
var lst = []
var lst2 = []
var lst3 = []
alert(cityu);
alert(dateu);
alert(numberu);
d3.csv("kyle.csv", function(d) {
return {
city: d.from,
number: d.phone_number,
date: d.from_date
};
}, function(error, rows) {
var i;
if (dateu.length > 0) {
for (i = 0; i < rows.length; i++) {
if (rows[i].date === dateu) {
lst.push(rows[i]);
console.log(rows[i]);
}
}
}
if (cityu.length > 0) {
for (i = 0; i < lst.city.length; i++) {
if (lst.city[i] === cityu) {
lst2.push(lst[i]);
console.log(lst2);
}
}
}
if (numberu.length > 0) {
for (i = 0; i < rows.length; i++) {
if (lst.number[i] === numberu) {
lst3.push(lst2[i]);
console.log(lst3);
}
}
}
});
};
One minor inconsequential change, moved the declaration of var i to the top of the function block, because technically you were declaring it three times, and jslint/jshint would complain - though nothing would break (yet)
I'm still not completely sure on your logic, but looking at Tiny Giant's gist, it seems like there are only three combinations:
1) Only dateu exists.
2) dateu and cityu exist.
3) dateu, cityu, and numberu exist.
So you don't care about the condition where dateu and numberu exist, but cityu is empty, right?
Okay, I reread your code. It seems like you have rows, and you have three possible filters. Filter rows based on AND, for example cityu AND dateu.
If so, here's a giant refactor. Just as a note, there may be some JavaScript errors because I had no way of testing this. But the code is fairly simple and straightforward:
var lst = [] // I'm not using these.
var lst2 = []
var lst3 = []
alert(cityu);
alert(dateu);
alert(numberu);
var getActiveFilters = function() {
// Edit possibleFilters as necessary.
// the key should reflect the header of the column
// and the value is a variable referring to the user-inputted string
var possibleFilters = {
'date': dateu,
'city': cityu,
'number': numberu
};
var activeFilters = {};
for (key in possibleFilters) {
if (possibleFilters[key].length > 0) {
activeFilters[key] = possibleFilters[key];
}
}
return activeFilters;
}
// just made this into a function to get it out of the callback
var functionAfterCsv = function(rows) {
var activeFilters = getActiveFilters();
var filteredList = [];
var addRow = false;
for(i = 0; i < rows.length; i++) {
// see if the current row matches all the filters present
for (key in activeFilters) {
if (rows[i][key] === activeFilters[key]) {
addRow = true;
} else {
addRow = false;
// if the row doesn't meet one of the conditions,
// there's no need to check the rest
break;
}
}
if (addRow) {
filteredList.push(row[i]);
}
}
return filteredList;
};
d3.csv("kyle.csv", function (d) {
return {
city: d.from,
number: d.phone_number,
date: d.from_date
};
}, function (error, rows) {
functionAfterCsv(rows);
})
});
If you're filtering using OR, then you'll need to change your comparison to something like this:
for (key in activeFilters) {
if (rows[i][key] === activeFilters[key]) {
addRow = true;
break; // if one is true, that's good enough for an OR
} else {
addRow = addRow || false;
}
}
if (addRow) {
filteredList.push(row[i]);
// reset addRow for the next row
addRow = false;
}
Hope this was closer to your intended logic!
In Javascript, I don't see any tutorials clearly explain how to create like
MyItems[Row][Index][categories]
so that
MyItems[0][0][0]=1
MyItems[1][0][0]='stock'
MyItems[5][1][0]='pending'
My use case is each Index will contain different value which is integer or string.
What is the best way to avoid error when accessing MyItems[0][1][0] that has no value?
Because JS doesn't have actual multidimensional arrays, but instead merely have nested arrays that don't necessarily form a rectangular structure, you'd need to check for each nested array first. A simple "truthy" test would be fine.
if (myItems[0] && myItems[0][0])
myItems[0][0].push(1);
If you wanted to create the arrays that aren't there, then you can do that like this:
if (!myItems[0])
myItems[0] = [];
if (!myItems[0][0])
myItems[0][0] = [];
myItems[0][0].push(1);
Of course this assumes that the first and second levels should always be arrays, and only the third level will hold the actual values. You'll need to adjust it if that's not the case.
Also, a function would be a good idea to get rid of the repetition.
function addNested(outer, idx1, idx2, idx3, value) {
if (!outer[idx1])
outer[idx1] = [];
if (!outer[idx1][idx2])
outer[idx1][idx2] = [];
outer[idx1][idx2][idx3] = value;
}
addNested(myItems, 1, 0, 0, 'stock');
This is how you'd make a 3D array, but I'd recommend against mixing data types in your array, that's not exactly a common or standard practice.
// just filler stuff, ignore the body of this function
function getStringOrNumber(row, col, cat) {
var thing = row * cols * cats + col * cats + cat;
return Math.random() < .5 ? thing : thing.toString();
}
// something to deal with each value
function doSomething(value) {
switch (typeof value) {
case 'string':
// logic for string type
break;
case 'number':
// logic for number type
break;
default:
// unexpected?
break;
}
}
// here's how you make your 3D array
var rows = 10,
cols = 10,
cats = 10,
array3d = new Array(rows),
i, j, k;
for (i = 0; i < rows; i++) {
array3d[i] = new Array(cols);
for (j = 0; j < cols; j++) {
array3d[i][j] = new Array(cats);
for (k = 0; k < cats; k++) {
array3d[i][j][k] = getStringOrNumber(i, j, k);
doSomething(array3d[i][j][k]);
}
}
}
If you want to check whether an index exists on the 3d array, try a function like this:
function setValue(array3d, row, col, cat, value) {
if (array3d[row] && array3d[row][col] && array3d[row][col][cat]) {
array3d[row][col][cat] = value;
} else {
throw new RangeError("Indices out of range");
}
}
If you were to allocate each array at each index in a breadth-first pattern before accessing any of it, then this would work without any special handling.
However, as you've correctly recognized, if you want to be able to access indexes that may not have been allocated yet, this won't work.
Actually, to be more specific, you are allowed to attempt to read an index outside the length of an array, in which case you'll get undefined. The problem is that if you get undefined for the first or second depth, then an attempt to index that undefined value will fail.
Thus, to prevent this error, you must guard against undefined first- or second-depth indexes.
The best way to do this is to write a class that provides a getter and setter that automatically take care of the special handling requirements. Here's an example of such a class, defined using the prototype pattern:
(function() {
var Array3D = function() {
this.data = [];
};
Array3D.prototype.get = function(r,c,z) {
if (this.data.length <= r) return undefined;
if (this.data[r].length <= c) return undefined;
return this.data[r][c][z];
};
Array3D.prototype.set = function(r,c,z,v) {
if (this.data.length <= r) this.data[r] = [];
if (this.data[r].length <= c) this.data[r][c] = [];
this.data[r][c][z] = v;
return this;
};
window.Array3D = Array3D;
})();
var a = new Array3D();
alert(a.get(0,0,0)); // undefined, no error
a.set(0,0,0,'x');
alert(a.get(0,0,0)); // 'x'
a.set(234,1234,342,'y');
alert(a.get(234,1234,342)); // 'y'
alert(a.get(0,1,0)); // undefined, no error
alert(a.get(12341234,243787,234234)); // undefined, no error
Since this completely differs from my other answer, I thought it would be helpful to suggest another approach using nested sparse arrays which could be implemented using associative arrays or objects. Try this:
// N-dimensional array
function ArrayND() {
// nothing to do here, seriously
}
ArrayND.prototype.setValue = function (value) {
var indices = arguments,
nest = this,
index, i;
// note the range of values since the last recursion is being set to a value
for (i = 1; i < indices.length - 2; i++) {
index = indices[i];
if (nest[index] instanceof ArrayND) {
nest = nest[index];
} else if (typeof nest[index] === "undefined") {
// recursive functionality!
nest = nest[index] = new ArrayND();
} else {
// we don't want to get rid of this value by accident!
return false;
}
}
// now "nest" is equal to the ArrayND you want to set the value inside of
index = indices[i];
nest[index] = value;
// we set the value successfully!
return true;
}
ArrayND.prototype.getValue = function () {
var indices = arguments,
nest = this,
index, i;
// note the range because we're getting the last value
for (i = 0; i < indices.length; i++) {
index = indices[i];
// for last recursion, just has to exist, not be ArrayND
if (nest[index]) {
nest = nest[index];
} else {
// nothing is defined where you're trying to access
return undefined;
}
}
return nest;
}
var arrayND = new ArrayND();
arrayND.setValue(1, 0, 0, 0);
arrayND.setValue("stock", 1, 0, 0);
arrayND.setValue("pending", 5, 1, 0);
// you can treat it like a normal 3D array if you want
console.log(arrayND[0][0][0]); // 1
console.log(arrayND[1][0][0]); // "stock"
console.log(arrayND[5][1][0]); // "pending"
// or use a nicer way to get the values
console.log(arrayND.getValue(1, 0, 0)); // "stock"
// phew, no errors!
console.log(arrayND.getValue(3, 1, 0)); // undefined
// some awesome recursive functionality!
console.log(arrayND.getValue(5).getValue(1).getValue(0)); // "pending"
I'm trying to pick a random film from an object containing film objects. I need to be able to call the function repeatedly getting distinct results until every film has been used.
I have this function, but it doesn't work because the outer function returns with nothing even if the inner function calls itself because the result is not unique.
var watchedFilms = [];
$scope.watchedFilms = watchedFilms;
var getRandomFilm = function(movies) {
var moviesLength = Object.keys(movies).length;
function doPick() {
var pick = pickRandomProperty(movies);
var distinct = true;
for (var i = 0;i < watchedFilms.length; i += 1) {
if (watchedFilms[i]===pick.title) {
distinct = false;
if (watchedFilms.length === moviesLength) {
watchedFilms = [];
}
}
}
if (distinct === true) {
watchedFilms.push(pick.title);
return pick;
}
if (distinct === false) {
console.log(pick.title+' has already been picked');
doPick();
}
};
return doPick();
}
T.J. Crowder already gave a great answer, however I wanted to show an alternative way of solving the problem using OO.
You could create an object that wraps over an array and makes sure that a random unused item is returned everytime. The version I created is cyclic, which means that it infinitely loops over the collection, but if you want to stop the cycle, you can just track how many movies were chosen and stop once you reached the total number of movies.
function CyclicRandomIterator(list) {
this.list = list;
this.usedIndexes = {};
this.displayedCount = 0;
}
CyclicRandomIterator.prototype.next = function () {
var len = this.list.length,
usedIndexes = this.usedIndexes,
lastBatchIndex = this.lastBatchIndex,
denyLastBatchIndex = this.displayedCount !== len - 1,
index;
if (this.displayedCount === len) {
lastBatchIndex = this.lastBatchIndex = this.lastIndex;
usedIndexes = this.usedIndexes = {};
this.displayedCount = 0;
}
do index = Math.floor(Math.random() * len);
while (usedIndexes[index] || (lastBatchIndex === index && denyLastBatchIndex));
this.displayedCount++;
usedIndexes[this.lastIndex = index] = true;
return this.list[index];
};
Then you can simply do something like:
var randomMovies = new CyclicRandomIterator(Object.keys(movies));
var randomMovie = movies[randomMovies.next()];
Note that the advantage of my implementation if you are cycling through items is that the same item will never be returned twice in a row, even at the beginning of a new cycle.
Update: You've said you can modify the film objects, so that simplifies things:
var getRandomFilm = function(movies) {
var keys = Object.keys(movies);
var keyCount = keys.length;
var candidate;
var counter = keyCount * 2;
// Try a random pick
while (--counter) {
candidate = movies[keys[Math.floor(Math.random() * keyCount)]];
if (!candidate.watched) {
candidate.watched = true;
return candidate;
}
}
// We've done two full count loops and not found one, find the
// *first* one we haven't watched, or of course return null if
// they've all been watched
for (counter = 0; counter < keyCount; ++counter) {
candidate = movies[keys[counter]];
if (!candidate.watched) {
candidate.watched = true;
return candidate;
}
}
return null;
}
This has the advantage that it doesn't matter if you call it with the same movies object or not.
Note the safety valve. Basically, as the number of watched films approaches the total number of films, our odds of picking a candidate at random get smaller. So if we've failed to do that after looping for twice as many iterations as there are films, we give up and just pick the first, if any.
Original (which doesn't modify film objects)
If you can't modify the film objects, you do still need the watchedFilms array, but it's fairly simple:
var watchedFilms = [];
$scope.watchedFilms = watchedFilms;
var getRandomFilm = function(movies) {
var keys = Object.keys(movies);
var keyCount = keys.length;
var candidate;
if (watchedFilms.length >= keyCount) {
return null;
}
while (true) {
candidate = movies[keys[Math.floor(Math.random() * keyCount)]];
if (watchedFilms.indexOf(candidate) === -1) {
watchedFilms.push(candidate);
return candidate;
}
}
}
Note that like your code, this assumes getRandomFilm is called with the same movies object each time.
I have this problem about arrays that I can't seem to solve. What I'm trying to do is to return numbers that are not inside the array. Return can only be done if the new value is not inside the array, else it's going to increment the value (to make sure that there is no space).
My code goes like:
function create_number(number) {
var array = [1,2,3,6,7,8,9];
for (var i=0;i<array.length;i++) {
if (array[i] == number) {
return number;
} else {
// create a new number that is not inside the array, and return it.
}
// If not just do the loop again.
// If the loop is over, then just create a valid number
// that is not found inside the array.
}
}
var array = [1,2,3,6,7,8,9];
var number = 0;
while (true) {
if (array.indexOf(++number) == -1) {
array.push(number);
return number;
}
}
but you need to persist array somewhere
PS: Array.prototype.indexOf shim for ancient browsers (credits to #Lochemage)
PPS: the solution above is O(N^2), just for fun here is O(N) one (it requires the array to be sorted initially):
var array = [1,2,3,6,7,8,9];
var number = 1;
while (true) {
if (array[number - 1] != number) {
array.splice(number - 1, 0, number);
return number;
}
++number;
}