We Keep Coding

JointJs Cycle Detection

I am trying to implement an algorithm to detect cycles in a directed graph (only outbound connections) using JointJS. I have written the following code which does not perform expectedly.
var _elements = graph.getElements();
var visited = [];
var level = 0;
var isCycleExists;
for (var i = 0; i < _elements.length; i++) {
var elem = _elements[i];
//only checking nodes which do have predecessors
if ((graph.getPredecessors(elem).length > 0) && !elem.isLink()
&& hasCycle(elem, visited, level)) {
isCycleExists = true;
break;
}
}
function hasCycle(comp, visited, level) {
var successors = graph.getSuccessors(comp);
visited.push(comp.id);
for (var i = 0; i < successors.length; i++) {
var c = successors[i];
var _successors = graph.getSuccessors(c);
if (_successors.length == 0) {
continue;
}
if (visited.indexOf(c.id) > -1) {
return true;
}
visited.push(c.id);
if (hasCycle(c, visited.slice(), ++level)) {
return true;
}
}
return false;
}
It would be really helpful if anyone could help me in this.

The problem is successor is not the same as direct successor. Check out graph.getSuccessors(comp) value: if the lib uses consistent function names, that should contain B,C,D and E for the first run. So you mark those visited, but also run hasCycle(c, visited.slice(), ++level) where you are checking nodes starting from D again (I guess D is the first one for which you get the "already visited" case).
First, I'd recommend to get rid of doubling the iteration in your function, do smth like
function hasCycle(comp, visited, level) {
var successors = graph.getSuccessors(comp), i;
if (visited.indexOf(comp.id) > -1)
return true;
visited.push(comp.id);
for (i = 0; i < successors.length; i++)
if (hasCycle(successors[i], visited.slice(), ++level))
return true;
return false;
}
And second, more importantly, try the graph.getNeighbors method instead of graph.getSuccessors (remember to check only neighbors in one direction).

I believe I have found the root cause for such erratic behavior using this algorithm.
Actually JointJS API method getElements() returns the array of elements in the order of entry in the graph cells. That means if you create 3 elements A, B, C to create a graph like A-->B-->C but you have added these elements in the order A first, C second and B at the end. Now according to the if condition (graph.getPredecessors(elem).length > 0) && !elem.isLink() && hasCycle(elem, visited, level), the cycle detection actually starts from C. In this scenario, C doesn't have any outbound neighbor and it is marked as visited. Now, in the next iteration, B is checked (as it is entered into the Graph after C) and it has C as its outbound neighbor. Now C is again evaluated but C is already marked as visited. Hence, it shows existence of a loop.
So, I believe, our search in a graph should be started from the nodes which doesn't have any predecessors. For instance, in the previous example, our search must begin always with A. The graph also might contain one or several nodes which don't have any predecessor. In this scenario as well, we need to start our search from the nodes which don't have any predecessor. For instance, A1-->B, A1-->C, A2-->B, A2-->C like this. Our detection must begin from A1 and A2.
I have modified the methods as follows which conforms to the previous strategy:
function checkForCycleExistence() {
var visited = [];
var level = 0;
var isCycleExists;
var _elements = graph.getElements();
for (var i = 0; i < _elements.length; i++) {
var elem = _elements[i];
if ((graph.getPredecessors(elem).length == 0)
&& hasCycle(elem, visited, level)) {
isCycleExists = true;
break;
}
}
if (isCycleExists) {
console.log("Cycle Exists");
}
return isCycleExists;
}
function hasCycle(comp, visited, level) {
var neighbors = graph.getNeighbors(comp, {
outbound : true
}), i;
if (visited.indexOf(comp.id) > -1)
return true;
visited.push(comp.id);
for (i = 0; i < neighbors.length; i++)
if (hasCycle(neighbors[i], visited.slice(), ++level))
return true;
return false;
}

Optimize looping through 2 arrays javascript canvas game

I'm working on my first javascript canvas game, and I wonder is there a better way for comparing collisons between objects in 2 arrays. For example i have an array with rockets, and array with enemies, the code is working, but i think when arrays length becomes much larger it will have effect on the performance. Example 100 rockets through 100 enemies is 10000 iterations per frame
for (i in rockets){
rockets[i].x+=projectile_speed;
for (j in enemies){
if(collision(rockets[i], enemies[j])){
enemies[j].health-=5;
sound_hit[hit_counter-1].play();
hit_counter--;
if (hit_counter==0){
hit_counter=5;
}
rockets.splice(i,1);
if (enemies[j].health <= 0) {
score += enemies[j].score;
sound_explode[Math.floor(Math.random()*25)].play();
enemies[j].isDead = true;
}
} else if(rockets[i].x >= width){
rockets.splice(i,1);
}
}
}

If you want to test every rocket on every player its not really possible to do differently, without knowing more about position of players and rockets.
If you keep the collision function fast, this should though be no problem at all.
I can only think of two easy improvements on this:
when a collision is found use continue since looping over the rest of players should not be necessary (unless players is allowed to collide)
instead of splice'ing the rockets array multiple times, build a new one, excluding all "dead" rockets.
You should also consider using forEach, map and filter to make the code a bit easier to read:
rockets = rockets.filter(function(rocket) {
rocket.x+=projectile_speed;
if(rocket.x >= width) {
return false;
}
var enemy = enemies.find(function(enemy) { return collision(rocket, enemy) });
if(enemy) {
enemy.health-=5;
sound_hit[--hit_counter].play();
if (hit_counter==0){
hit_counter=5;
}
if (enemy.health <= 0) {
score += enemy.score;
sound_explode[Math.floor(Math.random()*25)].play();
enemy.isDead = true;
}
return false;
}
return true;
});

What you could try to do is to reduce the number of tests by grouping the enemies and rockets, so that you only have to test the elements in the same group.
Here is a simple implementation to show what I mean, this only partitions in X-direction, because your rockets only seem to travel horizontally:
var groupWidth = 100; // do some experiments to find a suitable value
var rocketGroups = [];
var enemyGroups = [];
// initalize groups, not shown (array of array of rocket/enemy),
// but here are some other function examples...
function addToGroups(element, groups) {
groups[element.x / groupWidth].push(element);
}
function move(element, groups, distance) {
if (element.x / groupWidth != (element.x + distance) / groupWidth) {
// remove element from the old group and put it in the new one
}
element.x += distance;
}
// Note: this is only to show the idea, see comments about length
function checkCollisions() {
var i,j,k;
for (i = 0; i < rocketGroups.length; i++) {
for (j = 0; j < rocketGroups[i].length; j++) {
for (k = 0; k < enemyGroups[i].length; k++) {
// only compares elements in the same group
checkPossibleCollision(rocketGroups[i], enemyGroups[i], j, k);
}
}
}
}

Blackjack javascript game infinite loop

I have created an utterly simple blackjack game that stores the first value of a shuffled array of cards into corresponding players' arrays, dealing them as actual hands. For some odd reason, I can't seem to find a way to execute the core part of the code multiple times without getting an infinite loop. For the time being, I have only tried running the quite commonplace "for" command which is meant for multiple statements, but just doesn't seem to work here.
The programm on its primitive form is as follows...
var dealerCards = [];
var playerCards = [];
var firstDeck = [];
function shuffle(o){
for(var j, x, i = o.length; i; j = Math.floor(Math.random() * i), x = o[--i], o[i] = o[j], o[j] = x);
return o;
}
function createShuffledDeckNumber(array, x) {
for (i = 0; i < 4*x; i++) {
array.push(1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13);
}
shuffle(array);
}
function drawCard(playersHand, playerSoft, playerHard) {
playersHand.push(firstDeck[0]);
firstDeck.shift();
}
function checkDeckDrawOne(playersHand) {
if (firstDeck.length === 0) {
createShuffledDeckNumber(firstDeck, 1);
drawCard(playersHand);
}else{
for (i = 0; i < 1; i++) {
drawCard(playersHand);
}
}
}
for (i = 0; i < 4; i++) {
dealerCards = [];
playerCards = [];
checkDeckDrawOne(dealerCards);
checkDeckDrawOne(dealerCards);
checkDeckDrawOne(playerCards);
checkDeckDrawOne(playerCards);
console.log("dealerCards",dealerCards,"playerCards",playerCards);
console.log("firstDeckDrawn", firstDeck, "Number", firstDeck.length);
}
Additional Notes;
The presumed objective could be performing calculations to figure out the winner by imitating the effect of consecutive computing rounds based on a finite number of values stored in each player's array. Although, I've tried a seried of different things when it comes to emulating the real life circumstances of actually playing blackjack, this version seems to do just that, by also giving the programmer the ability to introduce counting systems like KO or HiLo. The main logic behind the whole thing is fairly simple; order x shuffled decks whenever a command that involves drawing a card is being executed unless the deck has at least one card.
It's rather fair to ponder why should I possibly bother creating multiple rounds in such a game. Reason is, that I want to create an autoplayer application that provides me with percentages on processed data.

Your variable i in function checkDeckDrawOne() has global scope, meaning it alters the value of i in the main loop:
for (i = 0; i < 4; i++) {
dealerCards = [];
playerCards = [];
checkDeckDrawOne(dealerCards);
checkDeckDrawOne(dealerCards);
checkDeckDrawOne(playerCards);
checkDeckDrawOne(playerCards);
console.log("dealerCards",dealerCards,"playerCards",playerCards);
console.log("firstDeckDrawn", firstDeck, "Number", firstDeck.length);
}
Change this:
for (i = 0; i < 1; i++) {
drawCard(playersHand);
}
to this:
for (var i = 0; i < 1; i++) {
drawCard(playersHand);
}
although why you need a loop here anyway is baffling.

JS crashes sometimes with Timer scramble

My Javascript timer is for people with a rubiks cube with generates a scramble (nevermind all this, but just to tell you I'm generating after each solve a new scramble will be generated) and my scrambles do actually have a while (true) statement. So that does crash my script, but it 95/100 times stops just before the script crashes but I don't wanna have any times.
Let me explain a bit more detailed about the problem.
Problem: javascript crashes because my script takes too long to generate a scramble.
Below you have 3 functions I use.
This function generates a scramble with the Fisher-Yates shuffle.
Timer.prototype.generateScramble = function(array) {
for (var i = array.length - 1; i > 0; i--) {
var j = Math.floor(Math.random() * (i + 1));
var temp = array[i];
array[i] = array[j];
array[j] = temp;
}
return array;
};
This function validates the input e.g. I receive an array as the following:
Here I only have to check the first character. That's why I use the seconds [ ] notation. I don't want people get an F with an F2 e.g.
var scr = ["F","R","U","B","L","D","F2","R2","U2","B2","L2","D2","F'","R'","U'","B'","L'","D'"]
Timer.prototype.validateScramble2 = function(array) {
var last = array.length-1;
for (var i = 0; i < array.length-1; i++) {
if (array[i][0] == array[i+1][0]) {
return false;
}
}
for (var i = 0; i < array.length-2; i++) {
if (array[i][0] == array[i+2][0]) {
return false;
}
}
if (array[0][0] == [last][0]) {
return false;
}
return true;
};
The above functions are just waiting to be called. Well in the function below I use them.
Timer.prototype.updateScramble2 = function(scrambleArr, len, type) {
var self = this;
var scramble = '', j, updatedArr = [];
while (updatedArr.length < len) {
j = (Math.floor(Math.random() * scrambleArr.length));
updatedArr.push(scrambleArr[j]);
}
while (!self.validateScramble2(updatedArr)) {
updatedArr = self.generateScramble(updatedArr);
}
for (var i = 0; i < updatedArr.length; i++) {
scramble += updatedArr[i] + ' ';
}
scrambleDiv.innerHTML = scramble;
};
I assume you guys understand it but let me explain it briefly.
The first while-loop adds a random value from the given array(scrambleArr) into a new array called updatedArr.
The next while-loop calls the validateScramble2() function if there isn't in an array F next to an F2.
The for-loop adds them into a new variable added with a whitespace and then later we show the scramble in the div: scrambleDiv.innerHTML = scramble;
What do I need know after all this information?
Well I wanna know why my updateScramble2() functions lets my browser crash every time and what I do wrong and how I should do it.

I'm not entirely sure I understand the question, but from the way your code looks, I think you have an infinite loop going on. It appears as if validateScramble2 always returns false which causes your second loop in updateScramble2 to perpetually run.
I suggest you insert a breakpoint in your code and inspect the values. You could also insert debugger; statements in your code, works the same way. Open dev tools prior to doing these.
A suggestion is instead of using loops, use a timer. This breaks up your loop into asynchronous iterations rather than synchronous. This allows the browser breathing space for other operations. Here's an example of a forEachAsync:
function forEachAsync(array, callback){
var i = 0;
var timer = setInterval(function(){
callback.call(null, array[i]);
if(++i >= array.length) clearInterval(timer);
}, 0);
}
forEachAsync([1,2,4], function(item){
console.log(item);
});
You can take this further and use Promises instead of callbacks.

Having trouble detecting undefined objects in an array

Quick bit about my background:
-been learning for about 3 months;
-work in tech support for a small software company. 2 years exp.
-a lot of knowledge is secondhand and I am still learning the basics
I am trying to create an object every second. The object is created directly to the last position of an array that remembers a set quantity of objects created before the most recent one
function Fruit(name, position) {
this.name = name;
this.position = position;
}
var showXMostRecentFruits = 20;
var fruitCounter = 0;
function generateName() {
var name = 'Experimental Fruit' + fruitCounter;
return name;
}
var fruitsArray = [];
function shiftFruits() {
for (i = 0; i < showXMostRecentFruits; i++) {
fruitsArray[i] = fruitsArray[i + 1];
}
function updateFruitPositions() {
for (i = 0; i < showXMostRecentFruits; i++) {
fruitsArray[i].position = i;
}
}
var fruitTimer; //used for setting and clearing setTimeout
function createNewFruit() {
shiftFruits();
fruitsArray[showXMostRecentFruits - 1] = new Fruit(generateName());
updateFruitPositions();
fruitCounter += 1;
fruitTimer = setTimeout(function() {
createNewFruit();
}, 1000);
}
Say the function createNewFruit() is run once
createNewFruit();
Then I try to pull some meaning from the array
console.log(fruitsArray[19];
All I get is:
Fruit {}
undefined
This issue is when I want to run a loop (see updateFruitPositions()) that updates a propery of each object in the array, an error is returned that the objects are undefined. I get that they are undefined because they are not assigned to unique variables (at least not that I'm aware of). How can I identify the objects or how can I create unique containers for them so I access them in the array?

You need to test whether a given element is set to something before attempting to write to one of its properties.
Instead of this...
for (i = 0; i < showXMostRecentFruits; i++) {
fruitsArray[i].position = i;
}
Use this:
for (i = 0; i < showXMostRecentFruits; i++) {
if (fruitsArray[i])
fruitsArray[i].position = i;
}
You fill the array from the end, staring with element 20. Without the if (fruitsArray[i]), you're attempting to set undefined.position = i for the first 19 elements.

You could replace the showFruits function with something much more efficient:
function shiftFruits() {
if (fruitsArray.length > showXMostRecentFruits) {
fruitsArray.shift();
}
}
and updateFruitPositions only needs to update members that exist, the length is controlled by shiftFruits:
function updateFruitPositions() {
for (i = 0; i < fruitsArray.length; i++) {
fruitsArray[i].position = i;
}
}
or where forEach is supported:
function updateFruitPositions() {
fruitsArray.forEach(function(fruit, i){fruit.position = i});
}
so it only visits members that exist. And the createNewFruit has:
fruitsArray.push(new Fruit(generateName());