We Keep Coding

Initialize array by range [duplicate]

I'm looking for any alternatives to the below for creating a JavaScript array containing 1 through to N where N is only known at runtime.
var foo = [];
for (var i = 1; i <= N; i++) {
foo.push(i);
}
To me it feels like there should be a way of doing this without the loop.

In ES6 using Array from() and keys() methods.
Array.from(Array(10).keys())
//=> [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9]
Shorter version using spread operator.
[...Array(10).keys()]
//=> [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9]
Start from 1 by passing map function to Array from(), with an object with a length property:
Array.from({length: 10}, (_, i) => i + 1)
//=> [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10]

You can do so:
var N = 10;
Array.apply(null, {length: N}).map(Number.call, Number)
result: [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9]
or with random values:
Array.apply(null, {length: N}).map(Function.call, Math.random)
result: [0.7082694901619107, 0.9572225909214467, 0.8586748542729765,
0.8653848143294454, 0.008339877473190427, 0.9911756622605026, 0.8133423360995948, 0.8377588465809822, 0.5577575915958732, 0.16363654541783035]
Explanation
First, note that Number.call(undefined, N) is equivalent to Number(N), which just returns N. We'll use that fact later.
Array.apply(null, [undefined, undefined, undefined]) is equivalent to Array(undefined, undefined, undefined), which produces a three-element array and assigns undefined to each element.
How can you generalize that to N elements? Consider how Array() works, which goes something like this:
function Array() {
if ( arguments.length == 1 &&
'number' === typeof arguments[0] &&
arguments[0] >= 0 && arguments &&
arguments[0] < 1 << 32 ) {
return [ … ]; // array of length arguments[0], generated by native code
}
var a = [];
for (var i = 0; i < arguments.length; i++) {
a.push(arguments[i]);
}
return a;
}
Since ECMAScript 5, Function.prototype.apply(thisArg, argsArray) also accepts a duck-typed array-like object as its second parameter. If we invoke Array.apply(null, { length: N }), then it will execute
function Array() {
var a = [];
for (var i = 0; i < /* arguments.length = */ N; i++) {
a.push(/* arguments[i] = */ undefined);
}
return a;
}
Now we have an N-element array, with each element set to undefined. When we call .map(callback, thisArg) on it, each element will be set to the result of callback.call(thisArg, element, index, array). Therefore, [undefined, undefined, …, undefined].map(Number.call, Number) would map each element to (Number.call).call(Number, undefined, index, array), which is the same as Number.call(undefined, index, array), which, as we observed earlier, evaluates to index. That completes the array whose elements are the same as their index.
Why go through the trouble of Array.apply(null, {length: N}) instead of just Array(N)? After all, both expressions would result an an N-element array of undefined elements. The difference is that in the former expression, each element is explicitly set to undefined, whereas in the latter, each element was never set. According to the documentation of .map():
callback is invoked only for indexes of the array which have assigned values; it is not invoked for indexes which have been deleted or which have never been assigned values.
Therefore, Array(N) is insufficient; Array(N).map(Number.call, Number) would result in an uninitialized array of length N.
Compatibility
Since this technique relies on behaviour of Function.prototype.apply() specified in ECMAScript 5, it will not work in pre-ECMAScript 5 browsers such as Chrome 14 and Internet Explorer 9.

Multiple ways using ES6
Using spread operator (...) and keys method
[ ...Array(N).keys() ].map( i => i+1);
Fill/Map
Array(N).fill().map((_, i) => i+1);
Array.from
Array.from(Array(N), (_, i) => i+1)
Array.from and { length: N } hack
Array.from({ length: N }, (_, i) => i+1)
Note about generalised form
All the forms above can produce arrays initialised to pretty much any desired values by changing i+1 to expression required (e.g. i*2, -i, 1+i*2, i%2 and etc). If expression can be expressed by some function f then the first form becomes simply
[ ...Array(N).keys() ].map(f)
Examples:
Array.from({length: 5}, (v, k) => k+1);
// [1,2,3,4,5]
Since the array is initialized with undefined on each position, the value of v will be undefined
Example showcasing all the forms
let demo= (N) => {
console.log(
[ ...Array(N).keys() ].map(( i) => i+1),
Array(N).fill().map((_, i) => i+1) ,
Array.from(Array(N), (_, i) => i+1),
Array.from({ length: N }, (_, i) => i+1)
)
}
demo(5)
More generic example with custom initialiser function f i.e.
[ ...Array(N).keys() ].map((i) => f(i))
or even simpler
[ ...Array(N).keys() ].map(f)
let demo= (N,f) => {
console.log(
[ ...Array(N).keys() ].map(f),
Array(N).fill().map((_, i) => f(i)) ,
Array.from(Array(N), (_, i) => f(i)),
Array.from({ length: N }, (_, i) => f(i))
)
}
demo(5, i=>2*i+1)

If I get what you are after, you want an array of numbers 1..n that you can later loop through.
If this is all you need, can you do this instead?
var foo = new Array(45); // create an empty array with length 45
then when you want to use it... (un-optimized, just for example)
for(var i = 0; i < foo.length; i++){
document.write('Item: ' + (i + 1) + ' of ' + foo.length + '<br/>');
}
e.g. if you don't need to store anything in the array, you just need a container of the right length that you can iterate over... this might be easier.
See it in action here: http://jsfiddle.net/3kcvm/

Arrays innately manage their lengths. As they are traversed, their indexes can be held in memory and referenced at that point. If a random index needs to be known, the indexOf method can be used.
This said, for your needs you may just want to declare an array of a certain size:
var foo = new Array(N); // where N is a positive integer
/* this will create an array of size, N, primarily for memory allocation,
but does not create any defined values
foo.length // size of Array
foo[ Math.floor(foo.length/2) ] = 'value' // places value in the middle of the array
*/
ES6
Spread
Making use of the spread operator (...) and keys method, enables you to create a temporary array of size N to produce the indexes, and then a new array that can be assigned to your variable:
var foo = [ ...Array(N).keys() ];
Fill/Map
You can first create the size of the array you need, fill it with undefined and then create a new array using map, which sets each element to the index.
var foo = Array(N).fill().map((v,i)=>i);
Array.from
This should be initializing to length of size N and populating the array in one pass.
Array.from({ length: N }, (v, i) => i)
In lieu of the comments and confusion, if you really wanted to capture the values from 1..N in the above examples, there are a couple options:
if the index is available, you can simply increment it by one (e.g., ++i).
in cases where index is not used -- and possibly a more efficient way -- is to create your array but make N represent N+1, then shift off the front.
So if you desire 100 numbers:
let arr; (arr=[ ...Array(101).keys() ]).shift()

In ES6 you can do:
Array(N).fill().map((e,i)=>i+1);
http://jsbin.com/molabiluwa/edit?js,console
Edit:
Changed Array(45) to Array(N) since you've updated the question.
console.log(
Array(45).fill(0).map((e,i)=>i+1)
);

Use the very popular Underscore _.range method
// _.range([start], stop, [step])
_.range(10); // => [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9]
_.range(1, 11); // => [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10]
_.range(0, 30, 5); // => [0, 5, 10, 15, 20, 25]
_.range(0, -10, -1); // => [0, -1, -2, -3, -4, -5, -6, -7, -8, -9]
_.range(0); // => []

function range(start, end) {
var foo = [];
for (var i = start; i <= end; i++) {
foo.push(i);
}
return foo;
}
Then called by
var foo = range(1, 5);
There is no built-in way to do this in Javascript, but it's a perfectly valid utility function to create if you need to do it more than once.
Edit: In my opinion, the following is a better range function. Maybe just because I'm biased by LINQ, but I think it's more useful in more cases. Your mileage may vary.
function range(start, count) {
if(arguments.length == 1) {
count = start;
start = 0;
}
var foo = [];
for (var i = 0; i < count; i++) {
foo.push(start + i);
}
return foo;
}

the fastest way to fill an Array in v8 is:
[...Array(5)].map((_,i) => i);
result will be: [0, 1, 2, 3, 4]

Performance
Today 2020.12.11 I performed tests on macOS HighSierra 10.13.6 on Chrome v87, Safari v13.1.2 and Firefox v83 for chosen solutions.
Results
For all browsers
solution O (based on while) is the fastest (except Firefox for big N - but it's fast there)
solution T is fastest on Firefox for big N
solutions M,P is fast for small N
solution V (lodash) is fast for big N
solution W,X are slow for small N
solution F is slow
Details
I perform 2 tests cases:
for small N = 10 - you can run it HERE
for big N = 1000000 - you can run it HERE
Below snippet presents all tested solutions A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
O
P
Q
R
S
T
U
V
W
X
function A(N) {
return Array.from({length: N}, (_, i) => i + 1)
}
function B(N) {
return Array(N).fill().map((_, i) => i+1);
}
function C(N) {
return Array(N).join().split(',').map((_, i) => i+1 );
}
function D(N) {
return Array.from(Array(N), (_, i) => i+1)
}
function E(N) {
return Array.from({ length: N }, (_, i) => i+1)
}
function F(N) {
return Array.from({length:N}, Number.call, i => i + 1)
}
function G(N) {
return (Array(N)+'').split(',').map((_,i)=> i+1)
}
function H(N) {
return [ ...Array(N).keys() ].map( i => i+1);
}
function I(N) {
return [...Array(N).keys()].map(x => x + 1);
}
function J(N) {
return [...Array(N+1).keys()].slice(1)
}
function K(N) {
return [...Array(N).keys()].map(x => ++x);
}
function L(N) {
let arr; (arr=[ ...Array(N+1).keys() ]).shift();
return arr;
}
function M(N) {
var arr = [];
var i = 0;
while (N--) arr.push(++i);
return arr;
}
function N(N) {
var a=[],b=N;while(b--)a[b]=b+1;
return a;
}
function O(N) {
var a=Array(N),b=0;
while(b<N) a[b++]=b;
return a;
}
function P(N) {
var foo = [];
for (var i = 1; i <= N; i++) foo.push(i);
return foo;
}
function Q(N) {
for(var a=[],b=N;b--;a[b]=b+1);
return a;
}
function R(N) {
for(var i,a=[i=0];i<N;a[i++]=i);
return a;
}
function S(N) {
let foo,x;
for(foo=[x=N]; x; foo[x-1]=x--);
return foo;
}
function T(N) {
return new Uint8Array(N).map((item, i) => i + 1);
}
function U(N) {
return '_'.repeat(5).split('').map((_, i) => i + 1);
}
function V(N) {
return _.range(1, N+1);
}
function W(N) {
return [...(function*(){let i=0;while(i<N)yield ++i})()]
}
function X(N) {
function sequence(max, step = 1) {
return {
[Symbol.iterator]: function* () {
for (let i = 1; i <= max; i += step) yield i
}
}
}
return [...sequence(N)];
}
[A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H,I,J,K,L,M,N,O,P,Q,R,S,T,U,V,W,X].forEach(f=> {
console.log(`${f.name} ${f(5)}`);
})
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.20/lodash.min.js" integrity="sha512-90vH1Z83AJY9DmlWa8WkjkV79yfS2n2Oxhsi2dZbIv0nC4E6m5AbH8Nh156kkM7JePmqD6tcZsfad1ueoaovww==" crossorigin="anonymous"> </script>
This snippet only presents functions used in performance tests - it does not perform tests itself!
And here are example results for chrome

This question has a lot of complicated answers, but a simple one-liner:
[...Array(255).keys()].map(x => x + 1)
Also, although the above is short (and neat) to write, I think the following is a bit faster
(for a max length of:
127, Int8,
255, Uint8,
32,767, Int16,
65,535, Uint16,
2,147,483,647, Int32,
4,294,967,295, Uint32.
(based on the max integer values), also here's more on Typed Arrays):
(new Uint8Array(255)).map(($,i) => i + 1);
Although this solution is also not so ideal, because it creates two arrays, and uses the extra variable declaration "$" (not sure any way to get around that using this method). I think the following solution is the absolute fastest possible way to do this:
for(var i = 0, arr = new Uint8Array(255); i < arr.length; i++) arr[i] = i + 1;
Anytime after this statement is made, you can simple use the variable "arr" in the current scope;
If you want to make a simple function out of it (with some basic verification):
function range(min, max) {
min = min && min.constructor == Number ? min : 0;
!(max && max.constructor == Number && max > min) && // boolean statements can also be used with void return types, like a one-line if statement.
((max = min) & (min = 0)); //if there is a "max" argument specified, then first check if its a number and if its graeter than min: if so, stay the same; if not, then consider it as if there is no "max" in the first place, and "max" becomes "min" (and min becomes 0 by default)
for(var i = 0, arr = new (
max < 128 ? Int8Array :
max < 256 ? Uint8Array :
max < 32768 ? Int16Array :
max < 65536 ? Uint16Array :
max < 2147483648 ? Int32Array :
max < 4294967296 ? Uint32Array :
Array
)(max - min); i < arr.length; i++) arr[i] = i + min;
return arr;
}
//and you can loop through it easily using array methods if you want
range(1,11).forEach(x => console.log(x));
//or if you're used to pythons `for...in` you can do a similar thing with `for...of` if you want the individual values:
for(i of range(2020,2025)) console.log(i);
//or if you really want to use `for..in`, you can, but then you will only be accessing the keys:
for(k in range(25,30)) console.log(k);
console.log(
range(1,128).constructor.name,
range(200).constructor.name,
range(400,900).constructor.name,
range(33333).constructor.name,
range(823, 100000).constructor.name,
range(10,4) // when the "min" argument is greater than the "max", then it just considers it as if there is no "max", and the new max becomes "min", and "min" becomes 0, as if "max" was never even written
);
so, with the above function, the above super-slow "simple one-liner" becomes the super-fast, even-shorter:
range(1,14000);

Using ES2015/ES6 spread operator
[...Array(10)].map((_, i) => i + 1)
console.log([...Array(10)].map((_, i) => i + 1))

You can use this:
new Array(/*any number which you want*/)
.join().split(',')
.map(function(item, index){ return ++index;})
for example
new Array(10)
.join().split(',')
.map(function(item, index){ return ++index;})
will create following array:
[1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10]

If you happen to be using d3.js in your app as I am, D3 provides a helper function that does this for you.
So to get an array from 0 to 4, it's as easy as:
d3.range(5)
[0, 1, 2, 3, 4]
and to get an array from 1 to 5, as you were requesting:
d3.range(1, 5+1)
[1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
Check out this tutorial for more info.

This is probably the fastest way to generate an array of numbers
Shortest
var a=[],b=N;while(b--)a[b]=b+1;
Inline
var arr=(function(a,b){while(a--)b[a]=a;return b})(10,[]);
//arr=[0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9]
If you want to start from 1
var arr=(function(a,b){while(a--)b[a]=a+1;return b})(10,[]);
//arr=[1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10]
Want a function?
function range(a,b,c){c=[];while(a--)c[a]=a+b;return c}; //length,start,placeholder
var arr=range(10,5);
//arr=[5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14]
WHY?
while is the fastest loop
Direct setting is faster than push
[] is faster than new Array(10)
it's short... look the first code. then look at all other functions in here.
If you like can't live without for
for(var a=[],b=7;b>0;a[--b]=b+1); //a=[1,2,3,4,5,6,7]
or
for(var a=[],b=7;b--;a[b]=b+1); //a=[1,2,3,4,5,6,7]

If you are using lodash, you can use _.range:
_.range([start=0], end, [step=1])
Creates an array of numbers
(positive and/or negative) progressing from start up to, but not
including, end. A step of -1 is used if a negative start is specified
without an end or step. If end is not specified, it's set to start
with start then set to 0.
Examples:
_.range(4);
// ➜ [0, 1, 2, 3]
_.range(-4);
// ➜ [0, -1, -2, -3]
_.range(1, 5);
// ➜ [1, 2, 3, 4]
_.range(0, 20, 5);
// ➜ [0, 5, 10, 15]
_.range(0, -4, -1);
// ➜ [0, -1, -2, -3]
_.range(1, 4, 0);
// ➜ [1, 1, 1]
_.range(0);
// ➜ []

the new way to filling Array is:
const array = [...Array(5).keys()]
console.log(array)
result will be: [0, 1, 2, 3, 4]

with ES6 you can do:
// `n` is the size you want to initialize your array
// `null` is what the array will be filled with (can be any other value)
Array(n).fill(null)

Very simple and easy to generate exactly 1 - N
const [, ...result] = Array(11).keys();
console.log('Result:', result);

Final Summary report .. Drrruummm Rolll -
This is the shortest code to generate an Array of size N (here 10) without using ES6. Cocco's version above is close but not the shortest.
(function(n){for(a=[];n--;a[n]=n+1);return a})(10)
But the undisputed winner of this Code golf(competition to solve a particular problem in the fewest bytes of source code) is Niko Ruotsalainen . Using Array Constructor and ES6 spread operator . (Most of the ES6 syntax is valid typeScript, but following is not. So be judicious while using it)
[...Array(10).keys()]

https://stackoverflow.com/a/49577331/8784402
With Delta
For javascript
smallest and one-liner
[...Array(N)].map((v, i) => from + i * step);
Examples and other alternatives
Array.from(Array(10).keys()).map(i => 4 + i * 2);
//=> [4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22]
[...Array(10).keys()].map(i => 4 + i * -2);
//=> [4, 2, 0, -2, -4, -6, -8, -10, -12, -14]
Array(10).fill(0).map((v, i) => 4 + i * 2);
//=> [4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22]
Array(10).fill().map((v, i) => 4 + i * -2);
//=> [4, 2, 0, -2, -4, -6, -8, -10, -12, -14]
[...Array(10)].map((v, i) => 4 + i * 2);
//=> [4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22]
Range Function
const range = (from, to, step) =>
[...Array(Math.floor((to - from) / step) + 1)].map((_, i) => from + i * step);
range(0, 9, 2);
//=> [0, 2, 4, 6, 8]
// can also assign range function as static method in Array class (but not recommended )
Array.range = (from, to, step) =>
[...Array(Math.floor((to - from) / step) + 1)].map((_, i) => from + i * step);
Array.range(2, 10, 2);
//=> [2, 4, 6, 8, 10]
Array.range(0, 10, 1);
//=> [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10]
Array.range(2, 10, -1);
//=> []
Array.range(3, 0, -1);
//=> [3, 2, 1, 0]
As Iterators
class Range {
constructor(total = 0, step = 1, from = 0) {
this[Symbol.iterator] = function* () {
for (let i = 0; i < total; yield from + i++ * step) {}
};
}
}
[...new Range(5)]; // Five Elements
//=> [0, 1, 2, 3, 4]
[...new Range(5, 2)]; // Five Elements With Step 2
//=> [0, 2, 4, 6, 8]
[...new Range(5, -2, 10)]; // Five Elements With Step -2 From 10
//=>[10, 8, 6, 4, 2]
[...new Range(5, -2, -10)]; // Five Elements With Step -2 From -10
//=> [-10, -12, -14, -16, -18]
// Also works with for..of loop
for (i of new Range(5, -2, 10)) console.log(i);
// 10 8 6 4 2
As Generators Only
const Range = function* (total = 0, step = 1, from = 0) {
for (let i = 0; i < total; yield from + i++ * step) {}
};
Array.from(Range(5, -2, -10));
//=> [-10, -12, -14, -16, -18]
[...Range(5, -2, -10)]; // Five Elements With Step -2 From -10
//=> [-10, -12, -14, -16, -18]
// Also works with for..of loop
for (i of Range(5, -2, 10)) console.log(i);
// 10 8 6 4 2
// Lazy loaded way
const number0toInf = Range(Infinity);
number0toInf.next().value;
//=> 0
number0toInf.next().value;
//=> 1
// ...
From-To with steps/delta
using iterators
class Range2 {
constructor(to = 0, step = 1, from = 0) {
this[Symbol.iterator] = function* () {
let i = 0,
length = Math.floor((to - from) / step) + 1;
while (i < length) yield from + i++ * step;
};
}
}
[...new Range2(5)]; // First 5 Whole Numbers
//=> [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
[...new Range2(5, 2)]; // From 0 to 5 with step 2
//=> [0, 2, 4]
[...new Range2(5, -2, 10)]; // From 10 to 5 with step -2
//=> [10, 8, 6]
using Generators
const Range2 = function* (to = 0, step = 1, from = 0) {
let i = 0,
length = Math.floor((to - from) / step) + 1;
while (i < length) yield from + i++ * step;
};
[...Range2(5, -2, 10)]; // From 10 to 5 with step -2
//=> [10, 8, 6]
let even4to10 = Range2(10, 2, 4);
even4to10.next().value;
//=> 4
even4to10.next().value;
//=> 6
even4to10.next().value;
//=> 8
even4to10.next().value;
//=> 10
even4to10.next().value;
//=> undefined
For Typescript
class _Array<T> extends Array<T> {
static range(from: number, to: number, step: number): number[] {
return Array.from(Array(Math.floor((to - from) / step) + 1)).map(
(v, k) => from + k * step
);
}
}
_Array.range(0, 9, 1);

Solution for empty array and with just number in array
const arrayOne = new Array(10);
console.log(arrayOne);
const arrayTwo = [...Array(10).keys()];
console.log(arrayTwo);
var arrayThree = Array.from(Array(10).keys());
console.log(arrayThree);
const arrayStartWithOne = Array.from(Array(10).keys(), item => item + 1);
console.log(arrayStartWithOne)

✅ Simply, this worked for me:
[...Array(5)].map(...)

There is another way in ES6, using Array.from which takes 2 arguments, the first is an arrayLike (in this case an object with length property), and the second is a mapping function (in this case we map the item to its index)
Array.from({length:10}, (v,i) => i)
this is shorter and can be used for other sequences like generating even numbers
Array.from({length:10}, (v,i) => i*2)
Also this has better performance than most other ways because it only loops once through the array.
Check the snippit for some comparisons
// open the dev console to see results
count = 100000
console.time("from object")
for (let i = 0; i<count; i++) {
range = Array.from({length:10}, (v,i) => i )
}
console.timeEnd("from object")
console.time("from keys")
for (let i =0; i<count; i++) {
range = Array.from(Array(10).keys())
}
console.timeEnd("from keys")
console.time("apply")
for (let i = 0; i<count; i++) {
range = Array.apply(null, { length: 10 }).map(function(element, index) { return index; })
}
console.timeEnd("apply")

Fast
This solution is probably fastest it is inspired by lodash _.range function (but my is simpler and faster)
let N=10, i=0, a=Array(N);
while(i<N) a[i++]=i;
console.log(a);
Performance advantages over current (2020.12.11) existing answers based on while/for
memory is allocated once at the beginning by a=Array(N)
increasing index i++ is used - which looks is about 30% faster than decreasing index i-- (probably because CPU cache memory faster in forward direction)
Speed tests with more than 20 other solutions was conducted in this answer

Using new Array methods and => function syntax from ES6 standard (only Firefox at the time of writing).
By filling holes with undefined:
Array(N).fill().map((_, i) => i + 1);
Array.from turns "holes" into undefined so Array.map works as expected:
Array.from(Array(5)).map((_, i) => i + 1)

In ES6:
Array.from({length: 1000}, (_, i) => i).slice(1);
or better yet (without the extra variable _ and without the extra slice call):
Array.from({length:1000}, Number.call, i => i + 1)
Or for slightly faster results, you can use Uint8Array, if your list is shorter than 256 results (or you can use the other Uint lists depending on how short the list is, like Uint16 for a max number of 65535, or Uint32 for a max of 4294967295 etc. Officially, these typed arrays were only added in ES6 though). For example:
Uint8Array.from({length:10}, Number.call, i => i + 1)
ES5:
Array.apply(0, {length: 1000}).map(function(){return arguments[1]+1});
Alternatively, in ES5, for the map function (like second parameter to the Array.from function in ES6 above), you can use Number.call
Array.apply(0,{length:1000}).map(Number.call,Number).slice(1)
Or, if you're against the .slice here also, you can do the ES5 equivalent of the above (from ES6), like:
Array.apply(0,{length:1000}).map(Number.call, Function("i","return i+1"))

Array(...Array(9)).map((_, i) => i);
console.log(Array(...Array(9)).map((_, i) => i))

for(var i,a=[i=0];i<10;a[i++]=i);
a = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10]

It seems the only flavor not currently in this rather complete list of answers is one featuring a generator; so to remedy that:
const gen = N => [...(function*(){let i=0;while(i<N)yield i++})()]
which can be used thus:
gen(4) // [0,1,2,3]
The nice thing about this is you don't just have to increment... To take inspiration from the answer #igor-shubin gave, you could create an array of randoms very easily:
const gen = N => [...(function*(){let i=0;
while(i++<N) yield Math.random()
})()]
And rather than something lengthy operationally expensive like:
const slow = N => new Array(N).join().split(',').map((e,i)=>i*5)
// [0,5,10,15,...]
you could instead do:
const fast = N => [...(function*(){let i=0;while(i++<N)yield i*5})()]

Algorithm to return all combinations of 3 combinations from a array of length 6 without the number appearing with the same set of numbers

I was trying to write a algorithm in javascript that returns all the possible 3 digit numbers numbers from a given array of length 6
For Example
var arr = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6];
I have already got the combinations with the same sets of numbers in different positions in the 2D array.
(The code which I took the help of)
If I have the same numbers in different combinations then I would like to remove them form the array. like I have [1, 2, 3] at index i in the array comtaining all the possible combinations then I would like to remove other combination with the same numbers like [2, 1, 3], [1, 3, 2] and so on..
Note the array also contains numbers repeated like [3, 3, 3], [2, 2, 2], [3, 2, 3] and so on
I expect an 2d array which has the values : [[1,2,3],[1,2,4],[1,2,5],[1,2,6],[1,3,4]] and so on (24 possibilities)
Is there any way to do this?

Extending the answer you linked, just filter out the results with the help of a Set.
Sort an individual result, convert them into a String using join(), check if it's present in set or not, and if not, then store them in the final result.
function cartesian_product(xs, ys) {
var result = [];
for (var i = 0; i < xs.length; i++) {
for (var j = 0; j < ys.length; j++) {
// transform [ [1, 2], 3 ] => [ 1, 2, 3 ] and append it to result []
result.push([].concat.apply([], [xs[i], ys[j]]));
}
}
return result;
}
function cartesian_power(xs, n) {
var result = xs;
for (var i = 1; i < n; i++) {
result = cartesian_product(result, xs)
}
return result;
}
function unique_cartesian_power(xs, n) {
var result = cartesian_power(xs, n);
var unique_result = [];
const set = new Set();
result.forEach(function(value) {
var representation = value.sort().join(' ');
if (!set.has(representation)) {
set.add(representation);
unique_result.push(value);
}
});
return unique_result;
}
console.log(unique_cartesian_power([1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6], 3));

const arr = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6];
const result = arr.reduce((a, v) => arr.reduce((a, v2) => {
arr.reduce((a, v3) => {
const current = [v, v2, v3].sort().join(",");
!a.find(_ => _.sort().join() === current) && a.push([v, v2, v3]);
return a;
}, a);
return a;
}, a), []);
console.log(result.length);
console.log(...result.map(JSON.stringify));

You could take an iterative and recursive approach by sorting the index and a temporary array for the collected values.
Because of the nature of going upwards with the index, no duplicate set is created.
function getCombination(array, length) {
function iter(index, right) {
if (right.length === length) return result.push(right);
if (index === array.length) return;
for (let i = index, l = array.length - length + right.length + 1; i < l; i++) {
iter(i + 1, [...right, array[i]]);
}
}
var result = [];
iter(0, []);
return result;
}
var array = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6],
result = getCombination(array, 3);
console.log(result.length);
result.forEach(a => console.log(...a));
.as-console-wrapper { max-height: 100% !important; top: 0; }

This is a good example, that it is usually worthwhile not asking for a specific answer for a generic problem shown with a specific question; however as you've requested - if you really have the above constraints which kind of don't make much sense to me, you could do it like that:
function combine(firstDigits, secondDigits, thirdDigits) {
let result = [];
firstDigits.forEach(firstDigit => {
// combine with all secondDigitPermutations
secondDigits.forEach(secondDigit => {
// combine with all thirdDigitPermutations
thirdDigits.forEach(thirdDigit => {
result.push([firstDigit, secondDigit, thirdDigit])
})
})
});
// now we have all permutations and simply need to filter them
// [1,2,3] is the same as [2,3,1]; so we need to sort them
// and check them for equality (by using a hash) and memoize them
// [1,2,3] => '123'
function hashCombination(combination) {
return combination.join('ಠ_ಠ');
}
return result
// sort individual combinations to make them equal
.map(combination => combination.sort())
.reduce((acc, currentCombination) => {
// transform the currentCombination into a "hash"
let hash = hashCombination(currentCombination);
// and look it up; if it is not there, add it to cache and result
if (!(hash in acc.cache)) {
acc.cache[hash] = true;
acc.result.push(currentCombination);
}
return acc;
}, {result: [], cache: {}})
.result;
}
console.log(combine([1,2,3,4,5,6],[1,2,3,4,5,6],[1,2,3,4,5,6]).length);
console.log(...combine([1,2,3,4,5,6],[1,2,3,4,5,6],[1,2,3,4,5,6]).map(JSON.stringify));
This does not include some super-clever assumptions about some index, but it does abuse the fact, that it's all about numbers. It is deliberately using no recursion, because this would easily explode, if the amount of combinations is going to be bigger and because recursion in itself is not very readable.
For a real world problem™ - you'd employ a somewhat similar strategy though; generating all combinations and then filter them. Doing both at the same time, is an exercise left for the astute reader. For finding combinations, that look different, but are considered to be the same you'd also use some kind of hashing and memoizing.

let arr1 = [1,2,3,4,5,6];
function getCombination(arr){
let arr2 = [];
for(let i=0; i<arr.length; i++){
for(let j=i; j<arr.length; j++){
for(let k=j; k<arr.length; k++){
arr2.push([arr[i],arr[j],arr[k]]);
}
}
}
return arr2;
}
console.log(getCombination(arr1));

Trying to solve symmetric difference using Javascript

I am trying to figure out a solution for symmetric
difference using javascript that accomplishes the following
objectives:
accepts an unspecified number of arrays as arguments
preserves the original order of the numbers in the arrays
does not remove duplicates of numbers in single arrays
removes duplicates occurring across arrays
Thus, for example,
if the input is ([1, 1, 2, 6], [2, 3, 5], [2, 3, 4]),
the solution would be, [1, 1, 6, 5, 4].
I am trying to solve this as challenge given by an online
coding community. The exact instructions of the challenge
state,
Create a function that takes two or more arrays and returns an array
of the symmetric difference of the provided arrays.
The mathematical term symmetric difference refers to the elements in
two sets that are in either the first or second set, but not in both.
Although my solution below finds the numbers that are
unique to each array, it eliminates all numbers occuring
more than once and does not keep the order of the numbers.
My question is very close to the one asked at finding symmetric difference/unique elements in multiple arrays in javascript. However, the solution
does not preserve the original order of the numbers and does not preserve duplicates of unique numbers occurring in single arrays.
function sym(args){
var arr = [];
var result = [];
var units;
var index = {};
for(var i in arguments){
units = arguments[i];
for(var j = 0; j < units.length; j++){
arr.push(units[j]);
}
}
arr.forEach(function(a){
if(!index[a]){
index[a] = 0;
}
index[a]++;
});
for(var l in index){
if(index[l] === 1){
result.push(+l);
}
}
return result;
}
symsym([1, 1, 2, 6], [2, 3, 5], [2, 3, 4]); // => Desired answer: [1, 1, 6. 5. 4]

As with all problems, it's best to start off writing an algorithm:
Concatenate versions of the arrays, where each array is filtered to contain those elements which no array other than the current one contains
Then just write that down in JS:
function sym() {
var arrays = [].slice.apply(arguments);
return [].concat.apply([], // concatenate
arrays.map( // versions of the arrays
function(array, i) { // where each array
return array.filter( // is filtered to contain
function(elt) { // those elements which
return !arrays.some( // no array
function(a, j) { //
return i !== j // other than the current one
&& a.indexOf(elt) >= 0 // contains
;
}
);
}
);
}
)
);
}
Non-commented version, written more succinctly using ES6:
function sym(...arrays) {
return [].concat(arrays .
map((array, i) => array .
filter(elt => !arrays .
some((a, j) => i !== j && a.indexOf(elt) >= 0))));
}

Here's a version that uses the Set object to make for faster lookup. Here's the basic logic:
It puts each array passed as an argument into a separate Set object (to faciliate fast lookup).
Then, it iterates each passed in array and compares it to the other Set objects (the ones not made from the array being iterated).
If the item is not found in any of the other Sets, then it is added to the result.
So, it starts with the first array [1, 1, 2, 6]. Since 1 is not found in either of the other arrays, each of the first two 1 values are added to the result. Then 2 is found in the second set so it is not added to the result. Then 6 is not found in either of the other two sets so it is added to the result. The same process repeats for the second array [2, 3, 5] where 2 and 3 are found in other Sets, but 5 is not so 5 is added to the result. And, for the last array, only 4 is not found in the other Sets. So, the final result is [1,1,6,5,4].
The Set objects are used for convenience and performance. One could use .indexOf() to look them up in each array or one could make your own Set-like lookup with a plain object if you didn't want to rely on the Set object. There's also a partial polyfill for the Set object that would work here in this answer.
function symDiff() {
var sets = [], result = [];
// make copy of arguments into an array
var args = Array.prototype.slice.call(arguments, 0);
// put each array into a set for easy lookup
args.forEach(function(arr) {
sets.push(new Set(arr));
});
// now see which elements in each array are unique
// e.g. not contained in the other sets
args.forEach(function(array, arrayIndex) {
// iterate each item in the array
array.forEach(function(item) {
var found = false;
// iterate each set (use a plain for loop so it's easier to break)
for (var setIndex = 0; setIndex < sets.length; setIndex++) {
// skip the set from our own array
if (setIndex !== arrayIndex) {
if (sets[setIndex].has(item)) {
// if the set has this item
found = true;
break;
}
}
}
if (!found) {
result.push(item);
}
});
});
return result;
}
var r = symDiff([1, 1, 2, 6], [2, 3, 5], [2, 3, 4]);
log(r);
function log(x) {
var d = document.createElement("div");
d.textContent = JSON.stringify(x);
document.body.appendChild(d);
}
One key part of this code is how it compares a given item to the Sets from the other arrays. It just iterates through the list of Set objects, but it skips the Set object that has the same index in the array as the array being iterated. That skips the Set made from this array so it's only looking for items that exist in other arrays. That allows it to retain duplicates that occur in only one array.
Here's a version that uses the Set object if it's present, but inserts a teeny replacement if not (so this will work in more older browsers):
function symDiff() {
var sets = [], result = [], LocalSet;
if (typeof Set === "function") {
try {
// test to see if constructor supports iterable arg
var temp = new Set([1,2,3]);
if (temp.size === 3) {
LocalSet = Set;
}
} catch(e) {}
}
if (!LocalSet) {
// use teeny polyfill for Set
LocalSet = function(arr) {
this.has = function(item) {
return arr.indexOf(item) !== -1;
}
}
}
// make copy of arguments into an array
var args = Array.prototype.slice.call(arguments, 0);
// put each array into a set for easy lookup
args.forEach(function(arr) {
sets.push(new LocalSet(arr));
});
// now see which elements in each array are unique
// e.g. not contained in the other sets
args.forEach(function(array, arrayIndex) {
// iterate each item in the array
array.forEach(function(item) {
var found = false;
// iterate each set (use a plain for loop so it's easier to break)
for (var setIndex = 0; setIndex < sets.length; setIndex++) {
// skip the set from our own array
if (setIndex !== arrayIndex) {
if (sets[setIndex].has(item)) {
// if the set has this item
found = true;
break;
}
}
}
if (!found) {
result.push(item);
}
});
});
return result;
}
var r = symDiff([1, 1, 2, 6], [2, 3, 5], [2, 3, 4]);
log(r);
function log(x) {
var d = document.createElement("div");
d.textContent = JSON.stringify(x);
document.body.appendChild(d);
}

I came across this question in my research of the same coding challenge on FCC. I was able to solve it using for and while loops, but had some trouble solving using the recommended Array.reduce(). After learning a ton about .reduce and other array methods, I thought I'd share my solutions as well.
This is the first way I solved it, without using .reduce.
function sym() {
var arrays = [].slice.call(arguments);
function diff(arr1, arr2) {
var arr = [];
arr1.forEach(function(v) {
if ( !~arr2.indexOf(v) && !~arr.indexOf(v) ) {
arr.push( v );
}
});
arr2.forEach(function(v) {
if ( !~arr1.indexOf(v) && !~arr.indexOf(v) ) {
arr.push( v );
}
});
return arr;
}
var result = diff(arrays.shift(), arrays.shift());
while (arrays.length > 0) {
result = diff(result, arrays.shift());
}
return result;
}
After learning and trying various method combinations, I came up with this that I think is pretty succinct and readable.
function sym() {
var arrays = [].slice.call(arguments);
function diff(arr1, arr2) {
return arr1.filter(function (v) {
return !~arr2.indexOf(v);
});
}
return arrays.reduce(function (accArr, curArr) {
return [].concat( diff(accArr, curArr), diff(curArr, accArr) )
.filter(function (v, i, self) { return self.indexOf(v) === i; });
});
}
That last .filter line I thought was pretty cool to dedup an array. I found it here, but modified it to use the 3rd callback parameter instead of the named array due to the method chaining.
This challenge was a lot of fun!

// Set difference, a.k.a. relative compliment
const diff = (a, b) => a.filter(v => !b.includes(v))
const symDiff = (first, ...rest) =>
rest.reduce(
(acc, x) => [
...diff(acc, x),
...diff(x, acc),
],
first,
)
/* - - - */
console.log(symDiff([1, 3], ['Saluton', 3])) // [1, 'Saluton']
console.log(symDiff([1, 3], [2, 3], [2, 8, 5])) // [1, 8, 5]

Just use _.xor or copy lodash code.

Another simple, yet readable solution:
/*
This filters arr1 and arr2 from elements which are in both arrays
and returns concatenated results from filtering.
*/
function symDiffArray(arr1, arr2) {
return arr1.filter(elem => !arr2.includes(elem))
.concat(arr2.filter(elem => !arr1.includes(elem)));
}
/*
Add and use this if you want to filter more than two arrays at a time.
*/
function symDiffArrays(...arrays) {
return arrays.reduce(symDiffArray, []);
}
console.log(symDiffArray([1, 3], ['Saluton', 3])); // [1, 'Saluton']
console.log(symDiffArrays([1, 3], [2, 3], [2, 8, 5])); // [1, 8, 5]
Used functions: Array.prototype.filter() | Array.prototype.reduce() | Array.prototype.includes()

function sym(arr1, arr2, ...rest) {
//creating a array which has unique numbers from both the arrays
const union = [...new Set([...arr1,...arr2])];
// finding the Symmetric Difference between those two arrays
const diff = union.filter((num)=> !(arr1.includes(num) && arr2.includes(num)))
//if there are more than 2 arrays
if(rest.length){
// recurrsively call till rest become 0
// i.e. diff of 1,2 will be the first parameter so every recurrsive call will reduce // the arrays till diff between all of them are calculated.
return sym(diff, rest[0], ...rest.slice(1))
}
return diff
}

Create a Map with a count of all unique values (across arrays). Then concat all arrays, and filter non unique values using the Map.
const symsym = (...args) => {
// create a Map from the unique value of each array
const m = args.reduce((r, a) => {
// get unique values of array, and add to Map
new Set(a).forEach((n) => r.set(n, (r.get(n) || 0) + 1));
return r;
}, new Map());
// combine all arrays
return [].concat(...args)
// remove all items that appear more than once in the map
.filter((n) => m.get(n) === 1);
};
console.log(symsym([1, 1, 2, 6], [2, 3, 5], [2, 3, 4])); // => Desired answer: [1, 1, 6, 5, 4]

This is the JS code using higher order functions
function sym(args) {
var output;
output = [].slice.apply(arguments).reduce(function(previous, current) {
current.filter(function(value, index, self) { //for unique
return self.indexOf(value) === index;
}).map(function(element) { //pushing array
var loc = previous.indexOf(element);
a = [loc !== -1 ? previous.splice(loc, 1) : previous.push(element)];
});
return previous;
}, []);
document.write(output);
return output;
}
sym([1, 2, 3], [5, 2, 1, 4]);
And it would return the output as: [3,5,4]

Pure javascript solution.
function diff(arr1, arr2) {
var arr3= [];
for(var i = 0; i < arr1.length; i++ ){
var unique = true;
for(var j=0; j < arr2.length; j++){
if(arr1[i] == arr2[j]){
unique = false;
break;
}
}
if(unique){
arr3.push(arr1[i]);}
}
return arr3;
}
function symDiff(arr1, arr2){
return diff(arr1,arr2).concat(diff(arr2,arr1));
}
symDiff([1, "calf", 3, "piglet"], [7, "filly"])
//[1, "calf", 3, "piglet", 7, "filly"]

My short solution. At the end, I removed duplicates by filter().
function sym() {
var args = Array.prototype.slice.call(arguments);
var almost = args.reduce(function(a,b){
return b.filter(function(i) {return a.indexOf(i) < 0;})
.concat(a.filter(function(i){return b.indexOf(i)<0;}));
});
return almost.filter(function(el, pos){return almost.indexOf(el) == pos;});
}
sym([1, 1, 2, 5], [2, 2, 3, 5], [3, 4, 5, 5]);
//Result: [4,5,1]

function sym(args) {
var initialArray = Array.prototype.slice.call(arguments);
var combinedTotalArray = initialArray.reduce(symDiff);
// Iterate each element in array, find values not present in other array and push values in combinedDualArray if value is not there already
// Repeat for the other array (change roles)
function symDiff(arrayOne, arrayTwo){
var combinedDualArray = [];
arrayOne.forEach(function(el, i){
if(!arrayTwo.includes(el) && !combinedDualArray.includes(el)){
combinedDualArray.push(el);
}
});
arrayTwo.forEach(function(el, i){
if(!arrayOne.includes(el) && !combinedDualArray.includes(el)){
combinedDualArray.push(el);
}
});
combinedDualArray.sort();
return combinedDualArray;
}
return combinedTotalArray;
}
console.log(sym([1, 1, 2, 5], [2, 2, 3, 5], [3, 4, 5, 5]));

This function removes duplicates because the original concept of symmetric difference operates over sets. In this example, the function operates on the sets this way: ((A △ B) △ C) △ D ...
function sym(...args) {
return args.reduce((old, cur) => {
let oldSet = [...new Set(old)]
let curSet = [...new Set(cur)]
return [
...oldSet.filter(i => !curSet.includes(i)),
...curSet.filter(i => !oldSet.includes(i))
]
})
}
// Running> sym([1, 1, 2, 6], [2, 3, 5], [2, 3, 4])
console.log(sym([1, 1, 2, 6], [2, 3, 5], [2, 3, 4]))
// Return> [1, 6, 5, 2, 4]

This works for me:
function sym() {
var args = [].slice.call(arguments);
var getSym = function(arr1, arr2) {
return arr1.filter(function(each, idx) {
return arr2.indexOf(each) === -1 && arr1.indexOf(each, idx + 1) === -1;
}).concat(arr2.filter(function(each, idx) {
return arr1.indexOf(each) === -1 && arr2.indexOf(each, idx + 1) === -1;
}));
};
var result = getSym(args[0], args[1]);
var len = args.length - 1, i = 2;
while (--len) {
result = [].concat(getSym(result, args[i]));
i++;
}
return result;
}
console.info(sym([1, 1, 2, 5], [2, 2, 3, 5], [6, 8], [7, 8], [9]));

Alternative: Use the lookup inside a map instead of an array
function sym(...vs){
var has = {};
//flatten values
vs.reduce((a,b)=>a.concat(b)).
//if element does not exist add it (value==1)
//or mark it as multiply found value > 1
forEach(value=>{has[value] = (has[value]||0)+1});
return Object.keys(has).filter(x=>has[x]==1).map(x=>parseInt(x,10));
}
console.log(sym([1, 2, 3], [5, 2, 1, 4],[5,7], [5]));//[3,4,7])

Hey if anyone is interested this is my solution:
function sym (...args) {
let fileteredArgs = [];
let symDiff = [];
args.map(arrayEl =>
fileteredArgs.push(arrayEl.filter((el, key) =>
arrayEl.indexOf(el) === key
)
)
);
fileteredArgs.map(elArr => {
elArr.map(el => {
let index = symDiff.indexOf(el);
if (index === -1) {
symDiff.push(el);
} else {
symDiff.splice(index, 1);
}
});
});
return (symDiff);
}
console.log(sym([1, 2, 3, 3], [5, 2, 1, 4]));

Here is the solution
let a=[1, 1, 2, 6]
let b=[2, 3, 5];
let c= [2, 3, 4]
let result=[...a,...b].filter(item=>!(a.includes(item) && b.includes(item) ))
result=[...result,...c].filter(item=>!(b.includes(item) && c.includes(item) ))
console.log(result) //[1, 1, 6, 5, 4]

Concise solution using
Arrow functions
Array spread syntax
Array filter
Array reduce
Set
Rest parameters
Implicit return
const symPair = (a, b) =>
[...a.filter(item => !b.includes(item)),
...b.filter(item => !a.includes(item))]
const sym = (...args) => [...new Set(args.reduce(symPair))]
The function symPair works for two input arrays, and the function sym works for two or more arrays, using symPair as a reducer.
const symPair = (a, b) =>
[...a.filter(item => !b.includes(item)),
...b.filter(item => !a.includes(item))]
const sym = (...args) => [...new Set(args.reduce(symPair))]
console.log(sym([1, 2, 3], [2, 3, 4], [6]))

const removeDuplicates = (data) => Array.from(new Set(data));
const getSymmetric = (data) => (val) => data.indexOf(val) === data.lastIndexOf(val)
function sym(...args) {
let joined = [];
args.forEach((arr) => {
joined = joined.concat(removeDuplicates(arr));
joined = joined.filter(getSymmetric(joined))
});
return joined;
}
console.log(sym([1, 2, 3], [5, 2, 1, 4]));

Below code worked fine all the scenarios. Try the below code
function sym() {
var result = [];
for (var i = 0; i < arguments.length; i++) {
if (i == 0) {
var setA = arguments[i].filter((val) => !arguments[i + 1].includes(val));
var setB = arguments[i + 1].filter((val) => !arguments[i].includes(val));
result = [...setA, ...setB];
i = i + 1;
} else {
var setA = arguments[i].filter((val) => !result.includes(val));
var setB = result.filter((val) => !arguments[i].includes(val));
result = [...setA, ...setB];
}
}
return result.filter((c, index) => {
return result.indexOf(c) === index;
}).sort();
}

My code passed all test cases for the similar question on freecodecamp. Below is code for the same.
function sym(...args) {
const result = args.reduce((acc, curr, i) => {
if (curr.length > acc.length) {
const arr = curr.reduce((a, c, i) => {
if(a.includes(c)){
}
if (!acc.includes(c) && !a.includes(c)) {
a.push(c);
}
if (!curr.includes(acc[i]) && i < acc.length) {
a.push(acc[i])
}
return a;
}, []);
return [...arr];
} else {
const arr = acc.reduce((a, c, i) => {
if(a.includes(c)){
}
if (!curr.includes(c) && !a.includes(c)) {
a.push(c);
}
if (!acc.includes(curr[i]) && i < curr.length) {
a.push(curr[i])
}
return a;
}, []);
return [...arr]
}
});
let ans = new Set([...result])
return [...ans]
}
sym([1,2,3,3],[5, 2, 1, 4,5]);

The right way to create an array with N range? [duplicate]

I'm looking for any alternatives to the below for creating a JavaScript array containing 1 through to N where N is only known at runtime.
var foo = [];
for (var i = 1; i <= N; i++) {
foo.push(i);
}
To me it feels like there should be a way of doing this without the loop.

In ES6 using Array from() and keys() methods.
Array.from(Array(10).keys())
//=> [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9]
Shorter version using spread operator.
[...Array(10).keys()]
//=> [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9]
Start from 1 by passing map function to Array from(), with an object with a length property:
Array.from({length: 10}, (_, i) => i + 1)
//=> [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10]

You can do so:
var N = 10;
Array.apply(null, {length: N}).map(Number.call, Number)
result: [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9]
or with random values:
Array.apply(null, {length: N}).map(Function.call, Math.random)
result: [0.7082694901619107, 0.9572225909214467, 0.8586748542729765,
0.8653848143294454, 0.008339877473190427, 0.9911756622605026, 0.8133423360995948, 0.8377588465809822, 0.5577575915958732, 0.16363654541783035]
Explanation
First, note that Number.call(undefined, N) is equivalent to Number(N), which just returns N. We'll use that fact later.
Array.apply(null, [undefined, undefined, undefined]) is equivalent to Array(undefined, undefined, undefined), which produces a three-element array and assigns undefined to each element.
How can you generalize that to N elements? Consider how Array() works, which goes something like this:
function Array() {
if ( arguments.length == 1 &&
'number' === typeof arguments[0] &&
arguments[0] >= 0 && arguments &&
arguments[0] < 1 << 32 ) {
return [ … ]; // array of length arguments[0], generated by native code
}
var a = [];
for (var i = 0; i < arguments.length; i++) {
a.push(arguments[i]);
}
return a;
}
Since ECMAScript 5, Function.prototype.apply(thisArg, argsArray) also accepts a duck-typed array-like object as its second parameter. If we invoke Array.apply(null, { length: N }), then it will execute
function Array() {
var a = [];
for (var i = 0; i < /* arguments.length = */ N; i++) {
a.push(/* arguments[i] = */ undefined);
}
return a;
}
Now we have an N-element array, with each element set to undefined. When we call .map(callback, thisArg) on it, each element will be set to the result of callback.call(thisArg, element, index, array). Therefore, [undefined, undefined, …, undefined].map(Number.call, Number) would map each element to (Number.call).call(Number, undefined, index, array), which is the same as Number.call(undefined, index, array), which, as we observed earlier, evaluates to index. That completes the array whose elements are the same as their index.
Why go through the trouble of Array.apply(null, {length: N}) instead of just Array(N)? After all, both expressions would result an an N-element array of undefined elements. The difference is that in the former expression, each element is explicitly set to undefined, whereas in the latter, each element was never set. According to the documentation of .map():
callback is invoked only for indexes of the array which have assigned values; it is not invoked for indexes which have been deleted or which have never been assigned values.
Therefore, Array(N) is insufficient; Array(N).map(Number.call, Number) would result in an uninitialized array of length N.
Compatibility
Since this technique relies on behaviour of Function.prototype.apply() specified in ECMAScript 5, it will not work in pre-ECMAScript 5 browsers such as Chrome 14 and Internet Explorer 9.

Multiple ways using ES6
Using spread operator (...) and keys method
[ ...Array(N).keys() ].map( i => i+1);
Fill/Map
Array(N).fill().map((_, i) => i+1);
Array.from
Array.from(Array(N), (_, i) => i+1)
Array.from and { length: N } hack
Array.from({ length: N }, (_, i) => i+1)
Note about generalised form
All the forms above can produce arrays initialised to pretty much any desired values by changing i+1 to expression required (e.g. i*2, -i, 1+i*2, i%2 and etc). If expression can be expressed by some function f then the first form becomes simply
[ ...Array(N).keys() ].map(f)
Examples:
Array.from({length: 5}, (v, k) => k+1);
// [1,2,3,4,5]
Since the array is initialized with undefined on each position, the value of v will be undefined
Example showcasing all the forms
let demo= (N) => {
console.log(
[ ...Array(N).keys() ].map(( i) => i+1),
Array(N).fill().map((_, i) => i+1) ,
Array.from(Array(N), (_, i) => i+1),
Array.from({ length: N }, (_, i) => i+1)
)
}
demo(5)
More generic example with custom initialiser function f i.e.
[ ...Array(N).keys() ].map((i) => f(i))
or even simpler
[ ...Array(N).keys() ].map(f)
let demo= (N,f) => {
console.log(
[ ...Array(N).keys() ].map(f),
Array(N).fill().map((_, i) => f(i)) ,
Array.from(Array(N), (_, i) => f(i)),
Array.from({ length: N }, (_, i) => f(i))
)
}
demo(5, i=>2*i+1)

If I get what you are after, you want an array of numbers 1..n that you can later loop through.
If this is all you need, can you do this instead?
var foo = new Array(45); // create an empty array with length 45
then when you want to use it... (un-optimized, just for example)
for(var i = 0; i < foo.length; i++){
document.write('Item: ' + (i + 1) + ' of ' + foo.length + '<br/>');
}
e.g. if you don't need to store anything in the array, you just need a container of the right length that you can iterate over... this might be easier.
See it in action here: http://jsfiddle.net/3kcvm/

Arrays innately manage their lengths. As they are traversed, their indexes can be held in memory and referenced at that point. If a random index needs to be known, the indexOf method can be used.
This said, for your needs you may just want to declare an array of a certain size:
var foo = new Array(N); // where N is a positive integer
/* this will create an array of size, N, primarily for memory allocation,
but does not create any defined values
foo.length // size of Array
foo[ Math.floor(foo.length/2) ] = 'value' // places value in the middle of the array
*/
ES6
Spread
Making use of the spread operator (...) and keys method, enables you to create a temporary array of size N to produce the indexes, and then a new array that can be assigned to your variable:
var foo = [ ...Array(N).keys() ];
Fill/Map
You can first create the size of the array you need, fill it with undefined and then create a new array using map, which sets each element to the index.
var foo = Array(N).fill().map((v,i)=>i);
Array.from
This should be initializing to length of size N and populating the array in one pass.
Array.from({ length: N }, (v, i) => i)
In lieu of the comments and confusion, if you really wanted to capture the values from 1..N in the above examples, there are a couple options:
if the index is available, you can simply increment it by one (e.g., ++i).
in cases where index is not used -- and possibly a more efficient way -- is to create your array but make N represent N+1, then shift off the front.
So if you desire 100 numbers:
let arr; (arr=[ ...Array(101).keys() ]).shift()

In ES6 you can do:
Array(N).fill().map((e,i)=>i+1);
http://jsbin.com/molabiluwa/edit?js,console
Edit:
Changed Array(45) to Array(N) since you've updated the question.
console.log(
Array(45).fill(0).map((e,i)=>i+1)
);

Use the very popular Underscore _.range method
// _.range([start], stop, [step])
_.range(10); // => [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9]
_.range(1, 11); // => [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10]
_.range(0, 30, 5); // => [0, 5, 10, 15, 20, 25]
_.range(0, -10, -1); // => [0, -1, -2, -3, -4, -5, -6, -7, -8, -9]
_.range(0); // => []

function range(start, end) {
var foo = [];
for (var i = start; i <= end; i++) {
foo.push(i);
}
return foo;
}
Then called by
var foo = range(1, 5);
There is no built-in way to do this in Javascript, but it's a perfectly valid utility function to create if you need to do it more than once.
Edit: In my opinion, the following is a better range function. Maybe just because I'm biased by LINQ, but I think it's more useful in more cases. Your mileage may vary.
function range(start, count) {
if(arguments.length == 1) {
count = start;
start = 0;
}
var foo = [];
for (var i = 0; i < count; i++) {
foo.push(start + i);
}
return foo;
}

the fastest way to fill an Array in v8 is:
[...Array(5)].map((_,i) => i);
result will be: [0, 1, 2, 3, 4]

Performance
Today 2020.12.11 I performed tests on macOS HighSierra 10.13.6 on Chrome v87, Safari v13.1.2 and Firefox v83 for chosen solutions.
Results
For all browsers
solution O (based on while) is the fastest (except Firefox for big N - but it's fast there)
solution T is fastest on Firefox for big N
solutions M,P is fast for small N
solution V (lodash) is fast for big N
solution W,X are slow for small N
solution F is slow
Details
I perform 2 tests cases:
for small N = 10 - you can run it HERE
for big N = 1000000 - you can run it HERE
Below snippet presents all tested solutions A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
O
P
Q
R
S
T
U
V
W
X
function A(N) {
return Array.from({length: N}, (_, i) => i + 1)
}
function B(N) {
return Array(N).fill().map((_, i) => i+1);
}
function C(N) {
return Array(N).join().split(',').map((_, i) => i+1 );
}
function D(N) {
return Array.from(Array(N), (_, i) => i+1)
}
function E(N) {
return Array.from({ length: N }, (_, i) => i+1)
}
function F(N) {
return Array.from({length:N}, Number.call, i => i + 1)
}
function G(N) {
return (Array(N)+'').split(',').map((_,i)=> i+1)
}
function H(N) {
return [ ...Array(N).keys() ].map( i => i+1);
}
function I(N) {
return [...Array(N).keys()].map(x => x + 1);
}
function J(N) {
return [...Array(N+1).keys()].slice(1)
}
function K(N) {
return [...Array(N).keys()].map(x => ++x);
}
function L(N) {
let arr; (arr=[ ...Array(N+1).keys() ]).shift();
return arr;
}
function M(N) {
var arr = [];
var i = 0;
while (N--) arr.push(++i);
return arr;
}
function N(N) {
var a=[],b=N;while(b--)a[b]=b+1;
return a;
}
function O(N) {
var a=Array(N),b=0;
while(b<N) a[b++]=b;
return a;
}
function P(N) {
var foo = [];
for (var i = 1; i <= N; i++) foo.push(i);
return foo;
}
function Q(N) {
for(var a=[],b=N;b--;a[b]=b+1);
return a;
}
function R(N) {
for(var i,a=[i=0];i<N;a[i++]=i);
return a;
}
function S(N) {
let foo,x;
for(foo=[x=N]; x; foo[x-1]=x--);
return foo;
}
function T(N) {
return new Uint8Array(N).map((item, i) => i + 1);
}
function U(N) {
return '_'.repeat(5).split('').map((_, i) => i + 1);
}
function V(N) {
return _.range(1, N+1);
}
function W(N) {
return [...(function*(){let i=0;while(i<N)yield ++i})()]
}
function X(N) {
function sequence(max, step = 1) {
return {
[Symbol.iterator]: function* () {
for (let i = 1; i <= max; i += step) yield i
}
}
}
return [...sequence(N)];
}
[A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H,I,J,K,L,M,N,O,P,Q,R,S,T,U,V,W,X].forEach(f=> {
console.log(`${f.name} ${f(5)}`);
})
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.20/lodash.min.js" integrity="sha512-90vH1Z83AJY9DmlWa8WkjkV79yfS2n2Oxhsi2dZbIv0nC4E6m5AbH8Nh156kkM7JePmqD6tcZsfad1ueoaovww==" crossorigin="anonymous"> </script>
This snippet only presents functions used in performance tests - it does not perform tests itself!
And here are example results for chrome

This question has a lot of complicated answers, but a simple one-liner:
[...Array(255).keys()].map(x => x + 1)
Also, although the above is short (and neat) to write, I think the following is a bit faster
(for a max length of:
127, Int8,
255, Uint8,
32,767, Int16,
65,535, Uint16,
2,147,483,647, Int32,
4,294,967,295, Uint32.
(based on the max integer values), also here's more on Typed Arrays):
(new Uint8Array(255)).map(($,i) => i + 1);
Although this solution is also not so ideal, because it creates two arrays, and uses the extra variable declaration "$" (not sure any way to get around that using this method). I think the following solution is the absolute fastest possible way to do this:
for(var i = 0, arr = new Uint8Array(255); i < arr.length; i++) arr[i] = i + 1;
Anytime after this statement is made, you can simple use the variable "arr" in the current scope;
If you want to make a simple function out of it (with some basic verification):
function range(min, max) {
min = min && min.constructor == Number ? min : 0;
!(max && max.constructor == Number && max > min) && // boolean statements can also be used with void return types, like a one-line if statement.
((max = min) & (min = 0)); //if there is a "max" argument specified, then first check if its a number and if its graeter than min: if so, stay the same; if not, then consider it as if there is no "max" in the first place, and "max" becomes "min" (and min becomes 0 by default)
for(var i = 0, arr = new (
max < 128 ? Int8Array :
max < 256 ? Uint8Array :
max < 32768 ? Int16Array :
max < 65536 ? Uint16Array :
max < 2147483648 ? Int32Array :
max < 4294967296 ? Uint32Array :
Array
)(max - min); i < arr.length; i++) arr[i] = i + min;
return arr;
}
//and you can loop through it easily using array methods if you want
range(1,11).forEach(x => console.log(x));
//or if you're used to pythons `for...in` you can do a similar thing with `for...of` if you want the individual values:
for(i of range(2020,2025)) console.log(i);
//or if you really want to use `for..in`, you can, but then you will only be accessing the keys:
for(k in range(25,30)) console.log(k);
console.log(
range(1,128).constructor.name,
range(200).constructor.name,
range(400,900).constructor.name,
range(33333).constructor.name,
range(823, 100000).constructor.name,
range(10,4) // when the "min" argument is greater than the "max", then it just considers it as if there is no "max", and the new max becomes "min", and "min" becomes 0, as if "max" was never even written
);
so, with the above function, the above super-slow "simple one-liner" becomes the super-fast, even-shorter:
range(1,14000);

Using ES2015/ES6 spread operator
[...Array(10)].map((_, i) => i + 1)
console.log([...Array(10)].map((_, i) => i + 1))

You can use this:
new Array(/*any number which you want*/)
.join().split(',')
.map(function(item, index){ return ++index;})
for example
new Array(10)
.join().split(',')
.map(function(item, index){ return ++index;})
will create following array:
[1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10]

If you happen to be using d3.js in your app as I am, D3 provides a helper function that does this for you.
So to get an array from 0 to 4, it's as easy as:
d3.range(5)
[0, 1, 2, 3, 4]
and to get an array from 1 to 5, as you were requesting:
d3.range(1, 5+1)
[1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
Check out this tutorial for more info.

This is probably the fastest way to generate an array of numbers
Shortest
var a=[],b=N;while(b--)a[b]=b+1;
Inline
var arr=(function(a,b){while(a--)b[a]=a;return b})(10,[]);
//arr=[0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9]
If you want to start from 1
var arr=(function(a,b){while(a--)b[a]=a+1;return b})(10,[]);
//arr=[1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10]
Want a function?
function range(a,b,c){c=[];while(a--)c[a]=a+b;return c}; //length,start,placeholder
var arr=range(10,5);
//arr=[5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14]
WHY?
while is the fastest loop
Direct setting is faster than push
[] is faster than new Array(10)
it's short... look the first code. then look at all other functions in here.
If you like can't live without for
for(var a=[],b=7;b>0;a[--b]=b+1); //a=[1,2,3,4,5,6,7]
or
for(var a=[],b=7;b--;a[b]=b+1); //a=[1,2,3,4,5,6,7]

If you are using lodash, you can use _.range:
_.range([start=0], end, [step=1])
Creates an array of numbers
(positive and/or negative) progressing from start up to, but not
including, end. A step of -1 is used if a negative start is specified
without an end or step. If end is not specified, it's set to start
with start then set to 0.
Examples:
_.range(4);
// ➜ [0, 1, 2, 3]
_.range(-4);
// ➜ [0, -1, -2, -3]
_.range(1, 5);
// ➜ [1, 2, 3, 4]
_.range(0, 20, 5);
// ➜ [0, 5, 10, 15]
_.range(0, -4, -1);
// ➜ [0, -1, -2, -3]
_.range(1, 4, 0);
// ➜ [1, 1, 1]
_.range(0);
// ➜ []

the new way to filling Array is:
const array = [...Array(5).keys()]
console.log(array)
result will be: [0, 1, 2, 3, 4]

with ES6 you can do:
// `n` is the size you want to initialize your array
// `null` is what the array will be filled with (can be any other value)
Array(n).fill(null)

Very simple and easy to generate exactly 1 - N
const [, ...result] = Array(11).keys();
console.log('Result:', result);

Final Summary report .. Drrruummm Rolll -
This is the shortest code to generate an Array of size N (here 10) without using ES6. Cocco's version above is close but not the shortest.
(function(n){for(a=[];n--;a[n]=n+1);return a})(10)
But the undisputed winner of this Code golf(competition to solve a particular problem in the fewest bytes of source code) is Niko Ruotsalainen . Using Array Constructor and ES6 spread operator . (Most of the ES6 syntax is valid typeScript, but following is not. So be judicious while using it)
[...Array(10).keys()]

https://stackoverflow.com/a/49577331/8784402
With Delta
For javascript
smallest and one-liner
[...Array(N)].map((v, i) => from + i * step);
Examples and other alternatives
Array.from(Array(10).keys()).map(i => 4 + i * 2);
//=> [4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22]
[...Array(10).keys()].map(i => 4 + i * -2);
//=> [4, 2, 0, -2, -4, -6, -8, -10, -12, -14]
Array(10).fill(0).map((v, i) => 4 + i * 2);
//=> [4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22]
Array(10).fill().map((v, i) => 4 + i * -2);
//=> [4, 2, 0, -2, -4, -6, -8, -10, -12, -14]
[...Array(10)].map((v, i) => 4 + i * 2);
//=> [4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22]
Range Function
const range = (from, to, step) =>
[...Array(Math.floor((to - from) / step) + 1)].map((_, i) => from + i * step);
range(0, 9, 2);
//=> [0, 2, 4, 6, 8]
// can also assign range function as static method in Array class (but not recommended )
Array.range = (from, to, step) =>
[...Array(Math.floor((to - from) / step) + 1)].map((_, i) => from + i * step);
Array.range(2, 10, 2);
//=> [2, 4, 6, 8, 10]
Array.range(0, 10, 1);
//=> [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10]
Array.range(2, 10, -1);
//=> []
Array.range(3, 0, -1);
//=> [3, 2, 1, 0]
As Iterators
class Range {
constructor(total = 0, step = 1, from = 0) {
this[Symbol.iterator] = function* () {
for (let i = 0; i < total; yield from + i++ * step) {}
};
}
}
[...new Range(5)]; // Five Elements
//=> [0, 1, 2, 3, 4]
[...new Range(5, 2)]; // Five Elements With Step 2
//=> [0, 2, 4, 6, 8]
[...new Range(5, -2, 10)]; // Five Elements With Step -2 From 10
//=>[10, 8, 6, 4, 2]
[...new Range(5, -2, -10)]; // Five Elements With Step -2 From -10
//=> [-10, -12, -14, -16, -18]
// Also works with for..of loop
for (i of new Range(5, -2, 10)) console.log(i);
// 10 8 6 4 2
As Generators Only
const Range = function* (total = 0, step = 1, from = 0) {
for (let i = 0; i < total; yield from + i++ * step) {}
};
Array.from(Range(5, -2, -10));
//=> [-10, -12, -14, -16, -18]
[...Range(5, -2, -10)]; // Five Elements With Step -2 From -10
//=> [-10, -12, -14, -16, -18]
// Also works with for..of loop
for (i of Range(5, -2, 10)) console.log(i);
// 10 8 6 4 2
// Lazy loaded way
const number0toInf = Range(Infinity);
number0toInf.next().value;
//=> 0
number0toInf.next().value;
//=> 1
// ...
From-To with steps/delta
using iterators
class Range2 {
constructor(to = 0, step = 1, from = 0) {
this[Symbol.iterator] = function* () {
let i = 0,
length = Math.floor((to - from) / step) + 1;
while (i < length) yield from + i++ * step;
};
}
}
[...new Range2(5)]; // First 5 Whole Numbers
//=> [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
[...new Range2(5, 2)]; // From 0 to 5 with step 2
//=> [0, 2, 4]
[...new Range2(5, -2, 10)]; // From 10 to 5 with step -2
//=> [10, 8, 6]
using Generators
const Range2 = function* (to = 0, step = 1, from = 0) {
let i = 0,
length = Math.floor((to - from) / step) + 1;
while (i < length) yield from + i++ * step;
};
[...Range2(5, -2, 10)]; // From 10 to 5 with step -2
//=> [10, 8, 6]
let even4to10 = Range2(10, 2, 4);
even4to10.next().value;
//=> 4
even4to10.next().value;
//=> 6
even4to10.next().value;
//=> 8
even4to10.next().value;
//=> 10
even4to10.next().value;
//=> undefined
For Typescript
class _Array<T> extends Array<T> {
static range(from: number, to: number, step: number): number[] {
return Array.from(Array(Math.floor((to - from) / step) + 1)).map(
(v, k) => from + k * step
);
}
}
_Array.range(0, 9, 1);

Solution for empty array and with just number in array
const arrayOne = new Array(10);
console.log(arrayOne);
const arrayTwo = [...Array(10).keys()];
console.log(arrayTwo);
var arrayThree = Array.from(Array(10).keys());
console.log(arrayThree);
const arrayStartWithOne = Array.from(Array(10).keys(), item => item + 1);
console.log(arrayStartWithOne)

✅ Simply, this worked for me:
[...Array(5)].map(...)

There is another way in ES6, using Array.from which takes 2 arguments, the first is an arrayLike (in this case an object with length property), and the second is a mapping function (in this case we map the item to its index)
Array.from({length:10}, (v,i) => i)
this is shorter and can be used for other sequences like generating even numbers
Array.from({length:10}, (v,i) => i*2)
Also this has better performance than most other ways because it only loops once through the array.
Check the snippit for some comparisons
// open the dev console to see results
count = 100000
console.time("from object")
for (let i = 0; i<count; i++) {
range = Array.from({length:10}, (v,i) => i )
}
console.timeEnd("from object")
console.time("from keys")
for (let i =0; i<count; i++) {
range = Array.from(Array(10).keys())
}
console.timeEnd("from keys")
console.time("apply")
for (let i = 0; i<count; i++) {
range = Array.apply(null, { length: 10 }).map(function(element, index) { return index; })
}
console.timeEnd("apply")

Fast
This solution is probably fastest it is inspired by lodash _.range function (but my is simpler and faster)
let N=10, i=0, a=Array(N);
while(i<N) a[i++]=i;
console.log(a);
Performance advantages over current (2020.12.11) existing answers based on while/for
memory is allocated once at the beginning by a=Array(N)
increasing index i++ is used - which looks is about 30% faster than decreasing index i-- (probably because CPU cache memory faster in forward direction)
Speed tests with more than 20 other solutions was conducted in this answer

Using new Array methods and => function syntax from ES6 standard (only Firefox at the time of writing).
By filling holes with undefined:
Array(N).fill().map((_, i) => i + 1);
Array.from turns "holes" into undefined so Array.map works as expected:
Array.from(Array(5)).map((_, i) => i + 1)

In ES6:
Array.from({length: 1000}, (_, i) => i).slice(1);
or better yet (without the extra variable _ and without the extra slice call):
Array.from({length:1000}, Number.call, i => i + 1)
Or for slightly faster results, you can use Uint8Array, if your list is shorter than 256 results (or you can use the other Uint lists depending on how short the list is, like Uint16 for a max number of 65535, or Uint32 for a max of 4294967295 etc. Officially, these typed arrays were only added in ES6 though). For example:
Uint8Array.from({length:10}, Number.call, i => i + 1)
ES5:
Array.apply(0, {length: 1000}).map(function(){return arguments[1]+1});
Alternatively, in ES5, for the map function (like second parameter to the Array.from function in ES6 above), you can use Number.call
Array.apply(0,{length:1000}).map(Number.call,Number).slice(1)
Or, if you're against the .slice here also, you can do the ES5 equivalent of the above (from ES6), like:
Array.apply(0,{length:1000}).map(Number.call, Function("i","return i+1"))

Array(...Array(9)).map((_, i) => i);
console.log(Array(...Array(9)).map((_, i) => i))

for(var i,a=[i=0];i<10;a[i++]=i);
a = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10]

It seems the only flavor not currently in this rather complete list of answers is one featuring a generator; so to remedy that:
const gen = N => [...(function*(){let i=0;while(i<N)yield i++})()]
which can be used thus:
gen(4) // [0,1,2,3]
The nice thing about this is you don't just have to increment... To take inspiration from the answer #igor-shubin gave, you could create an array of randoms very easily:
const gen = N => [...(function*(){let i=0;
while(i++<N) yield Math.random()
})()]
And rather than something lengthy operationally expensive like:
const slow = N => new Array(N).join().split(',').map((e,i)=>i*5)
// [0,5,10,15,...]
you could instead do:
const fast = N => [...(function*(){let i=0;while(i++<N)yield i*5})()]

How to find duplicated values in an Array [duplicate]

I need to check a JavaScript array to see if there are any duplicate values. What's the easiest way to do this? I just need to find what the duplicated values are - I don't actually need their indexes or how many times they are duplicated.
I know I can loop through the array and check all the other values for a match, but it seems like there should be an easier way.
Similar question:
Get all unique values in a JavaScript array (remove duplicates)

You could sort the array and then run through it and then see if the next (or previous) index is the same as the current. Assuming your sort algorithm is good, this should be less than O(n2):
const findDuplicates = (arr) => {
let sorted_arr = arr.slice().sort(); // You can define the comparing function here.
// JS by default uses a crappy string compare.
// (we use slice to clone the array so the
// original array won't be modified)
let results = [];
for (let i = 0; i < sorted_arr.length - 1; i++) {
if (sorted_arr[i + 1] == sorted_arr[i]) {
results.push(sorted_arr[i]);
}
}
return results;
}
let duplicatedArray = [9, 9, 111, 2, 3, 4, 4, 5, 7];
console.log(`The duplicates in ${duplicatedArray} are ${findDuplicates(duplicatedArray)}`);
In case, if you are to return as a function for duplicates. This is for similar type of case.
Reference: https://stackoverflow.com/a/57532964/8119511

If you want to elimate the duplicates, try this great solution:
function eliminateDuplicates(arr) {
var i,
len = arr.length,
out = [],
obj = {};
for (i = 0; i < len; i++) {
obj[arr[i]] = 0;
}
for (i in obj) {
out.push(i);
}
return out;
}
console.log(eliminateDuplicates([1,6,7,3,6,8,1,3,4,5,1,7,2,6]))
Source:
http://dreaminginjavascript.wordpress.com/2008/08/22/eliminating-duplicates/

This is my answer from the duplicate thread (!):
When writing this entry 2014 - all examples were for-loops or jQuery. JavaScript has the perfect tools for this: sort, map and reduce.
Find duplicate items
var names = ['Mike', 'Matt', 'Nancy', 'Adam', 'Jenny', 'Nancy', 'Carl']
const uniq = names
.map((name) => {
return {
count: 1,
name: name
};
})
.reduce((result, b) => {
result[b.name] = (result[b.name] || 0) + b.count;
return result;
}, {});
const duplicates = Object.keys(uniq).filter((a) => uniq[a] > 1);
console.log(duplicates); // [ 'Nancy' ]
More functional syntax:
#Dmytro-Laptin pointed out some code that can be removed. This is a more compact version of the same code. Using some ES6 tricks and higher-order functions:
const names = ['Mike', 'Matt', 'Nancy', 'Adam', 'Jenny', 'Nancy', 'Carl'];
const count = names =>
names.reduce((result, value) => ({ ...result,
[value]: (result[value] || 0) + 1
}), {}); // don't forget to initialize the accumulator
const duplicates = dict =>
Object.keys(dict).filter((a) => dict[a] > 1);
console.log(count(names)); // { Mike: 1, Matt: 1, Nancy: 2, Adam: 1, Jenny: 1, Carl: 1 }
console.log(duplicates(count(names))); // [ 'Nancy' ]

UPDATED: Short one-liner to get the duplicates:
[1, 2, 2, 4, 3, 4].filter((e, i, a) => a.indexOf(e) !== i) // [2, 4]
To get the array without duplicates simply invert the condition:
[1, 2, 2, 4, 3, 4].filter((e, i, a) => a.indexOf(e) === i) // [1, 2, 3, 4]
Note that this answer’s main goal is to be short. If you need something performant for a big array, one possible solution is to sort your array first (if it is sortable) then do the following to get the same kind of results as above:
myHugeSortedArray.filter((e, i, a) => a[i-1] === e)
Here is an example for a 1 000 000 integers array:
const myHugeIntArrayWithDuplicates =
[...Array(1_000_000).keys()]
// adding two 0 and four 9 duplicates
.fill(0, 2, 4).fill(9, 10, 14)
console.time("time")
console.log(
myHugeIntArrayWithDuplicates
// a possible sorting method for integers
.sort((a, b) => a > b ? 1 : -1)
.filter((e, i, a) => a[i-1] === e)
)
console.timeEnd("time")
On my AMD Ryzen 7 5700G dev machine it outputs:
[ 0, 0, 9, 9, 9, 9 ]
time: 22.738ms
As pointed out in the comments both the short solution and the performant solution will return an array with several time the same duplicate if it occurs more than once in the original array:
[1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 2].filter((e, i, a) => a.indexOf(e) !== i) // [1, 1, 2, 2, 2]
If unique duplicates are wanted then a function like
function duplicates(arr) {
return [...new Set(arr.filter((e, i, a) => a.indexOf(e) !== i))]
}
can be used so that duplicates([1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 2]) returns [1, 2].
When all you need is to check that there are no duplicates as asked in this question you can use the every() method:
[1, 2, 3].every((e, i, a) => a.indexOf(e) === i) // true
[1, 2, 1].every((e, i, a) => a.indexOf(e) === i) // false
Note that every() doesn't work for IE 8 and below.

Find duplicate values in an array
This should be one of the shortest ways to actually find duplicate values in an array. As specifically asked for by the OP, this does not remove duplicates but finds them.
var input = [1, 2, 3, 1, 3, 1];
var duplicates = input.reduce(function(acc, el, i, arr) {
if (arr.indexOf(el) !== i && acc.indexOf(el) < 0) acc.push(el); return acc;
}, []);
document.write(duplicates); // = 1,3 (actual array == [1, 3])
This doesn't need sorting or any third party framework. It also doesn't need manual loops. It works with every value indexOf() (or to be clearer: the strict comparision operator) supports.
Because of reduce() and indexOf() it needs at least IE 9.

You can add this function, or tweak it and add it to Javascript's Array prototype:
Array.prototype.unique = function () {
var r = new Array();
o:for(var i = 0, n = this.length; i < n; i++)
{
for(var x = 0, y = r.length; x < y; x++)
{
if(r[x]==this[i])
{
alert('this is a DUPE!');
continue o;
}
}
r[r.length] = this[i];
}
return r;
}
var arr = [1,2,2,3,3,4,5,6,2,3,7,8,5,9];
var unique = arr.unique();
alert(unique);

UPDATED: The following uses an optimized combined strategy. It optimizes primitive lookups to benefit from hash O(1) lookup time (running unique on an array of primitives is O(n)). Object lookups are optimized by tagging objects with a unique id while iterating through so so identifying duplicate objects is also O(1) per item and O(n) for the whole list. The only exception is items that are frozen, but those are rare and a fallback is provided using an array and indexOf.
var unique = function(){
var hasOwn = {}.hasOwnProperty,
toString = {}.toString,
uids = {};
function uid(){
var key = Math.random().toString(36).slice(2);
return key in uids ? uid() : uids[key] = key;
}
function unique(array){
var strings = {}, numbers = {}, others = {},
tagged = [], failed = [],
count = 0, i = array.length,
item, type;
var id = uid();
while (i--) {
item = array[i];
type = typeof item;
if (item == null || type !== 'object' && type !== 'function') {
// primitive
switch (type) {
case 'string': strings[item] = true; break;
case 'number': numbers[item] = true; break;
default: others[item] = item; break;
}
} else {
// object
if (!hasOwn.call(item, id)) {
try {
item[id] = true;
tagged[count++] = item;
} catch (e){
if (failed.indexOf(item) === -1)
failed[failed.length] = item;
}
}
}
}
// remove the tags
while (count--)
delete tagged[count][id];
tagged = tagged.concat(failed);
count = tagged.length;
// append primitives to results
for (i in strings)
if (hasOwn.call(strings, i))
tagged[count++] = i;
for (i in numbers)
if (hasOwn.call(numbers, i))
tagged[count++] = +i;
for (i in others)
if (hasOwn.call(others, i))
tagged[count++] = others[i];
return tagged;
}
return unique;
}();
If you have ES6 Collections available, then there is a much simpler and significantly faster version. (shim for IE9+ and other browsers here: https://github.com/Benvie/ES6-Harmony-Collections-Shim)
function unique(array){
var seen = new Set;
return array.filter(function(item){
if (!seen.has(item)) {
seen.add(item);
return true;
}
});
}

var a = ["a","a","b","c","c"];
a.filter(function(value,index,self){ return (self.indexOf(value) !== index )})

This should get you what you want, Just the duplicates.
function find_duplicates(arr) {
var len=arr.length,
out=[],
counts={};
for (var i=0;i<len;i++) {
var item = arr[i];
counts[item] = counts[item] >= 1 ? counts[item] + 1 : 1;
if (counts[item] === 2) {
out.push(item);
}
}
return out;
}
find_duplicates(['one',2,3,4,4,4,5,6,7,7,7,'pig','one']); // -> ['one',4,7] in no particular order.

Find non-unique values from 3 arrays (or more):
ES2015
// 🚩🚩 🚩 🚩 🚩
var arr = [1,2,2,3,3,4,5,6,2,3,7,8,5,22],
arr2 = [1,2,511,12,50],
arr3 = [22,0],
merged,
nonUnique;
// Combine all the arrays to a single one
merged = arr.concat(arr2, arr3)
// create a new (dirty) Array with only the non-unique items
nonUnique = merged.filter((item,i) => merged.includes(item, i+1))
// Cleanup - remove duplicate & empty items items
nonUnique = [...new Set(nonUnique)]
console.log(nonUnique)
PRE-ES2015:
In the below example I chose to superimpose a unique method on top of the Array prototype, allowing access from everywhere and has more "declarative" syntax. I do not recommend this approach on large projects, since it might very well collide with another method with the same custom name.
Array.prototype.unique = function () {
var arr = this.sort(), i=arr.length; // input must be sorted for this to work
while(i--)
arr[i] === arr[i-1] && arr.splice(i,1) // remove duplicate item
return arr
}
Array.prototype.nonunique = function () {
var arr = this.sort(), i=arr.length, res = []; // input must be sorted for this to work
while(i--)
arr[i] === arr[i-1] && (res.indexOf(arr[i]) == -1) && res.push(arr[i])
return res
}
// 🚩🚩 🚩 🚩 🚩
var arr = [1,2,2,3,3,4,5,6,2,3,7,8,5,22],
arr2 = [1,2,511,12,50],
arr3 = [22,0],
// merge all arrays & call custom Array Prototype - "unique"
unique = arr.concat(arr2, arr3).unique(),
nonunique = arr.concat(arr2, arr3).nonunique()
console.log(unique) // [1,12,2,22,3,4,5,50,511,6,7,8]
console.log(nonunique) // [1,12,2,22,3,4,5,50,511,6,7,8]

using underscore.js
function hasDuplicate(arr){
return (arr.length != _.uniq(arr).length);
}

The simplest and quickest way is to use the Set object:
const numbers = [1, 2, 3, 2, 4, 5, 5, 6];
const set = new Set(numbers);
const duplicates = numbers.filter(item => {
if (set.has(item)) {
set.delete(item);
return false;
} else {
return true;
}
});
// OR more concisely
const duplicates = numbers.filter(item => !set.delete(item));
console.log(duplicates);
// [ 2, 5 ]

This is my proposal (ES6):
let a = [1, 2, 3, 4, 2, 2, 4, 1, 5, 6]
let b = [...new Set(a.sort().filter((o, i) => o !== undefined && a[i + 1] !== undefined && o === a[i + 1]))]
// b is now [1, 2, 4]

Here's the simplest solution I could think of:
const arr = [-1, 2, 2, 2, 0, 0, 0, 500, -1, 'a', 'a', 'a']
const filtered = arr.filter((el, index) => arr.indexOf(el) !== index)
// => filtered = [ 2, 2, 0, 0, -1, 'a', 'a' ]
const duplicates = [...new Set(filtered)]
console.log(duplicates)
// => [ 2, 0, -1, 'a' ]
That's it.
Note:
It works with any numbers including 0, strings and negative numbers e.g. -1 -
Related question: Get all unique values in a JavaScript array (remove duplicates)
The original array arr is preserved (filter returns the new array instead of modifying the original)
The filtered array contains all duplicates; it can also contain more than 1 same value (e.g. our filtered array here is [ 2, 2, 0, 0, -1, 'a', 'a' ])
If you want to get only values that are duplicated (you don't want to have multiple duplicates with the same value) you can use [...new Set(filtered)] (ES6 has an object Set which can store only unique values)
Hope this helps.

Here is mine simple and one line solution.
It searches not unique elements first, then makes found array unique with the use of Set.
So we have array of duplicates in the end.
var array = [1, 2, 2, 3, 3, 4, 5, 6, 2, 3, 7, 8, 5, 22, 1, 2, 511, 12, 50, 22];
console.log([...new Set(
array.filter((value, index, self) => self.indexOf(value) !== index))]
);

Shortest vanilla JS:
[1,1,2,2,2,3].filter((v,i,a) => a.indexOf(v) !== i) // [1, 2, 2]

one liner simple way
var arr = [9,1,2,4,3,4,9]
console.log(arr.filter((ele,indx)=>indx!==arr.indexOf(ele))) //get the duplicates
console.log(arr.filter((ele,indx)=>indx===arr.indexOf(ele))) //remove the duplicates

var a = [324,3,32,5,52,2100,1,20,2,3,3,2,2,2,1,1,1].sort();
a.filter(function(v,i,o){return i&&v!==o[i-1]?v:0;});
or when added to the prototyp.chain of Array
//copy and paste: without error handling
Array.prototype.unique =
function(){return this.sort().filter(function(v,i,o){return i&&v!==o[i-1]?v:0;});}
See here: https://gist.github.com/1305056

Fast and elegant way using es6 object destructuring and reduce
It runs in O(n) (1 iteration over the array) and doesn't repeat values that appear more than 2 times
const arr = ['hi', 'hi', 'hi', 'bye', 'bye', 'asd']
const {
dup
} = arr.reduce(
(acc, curr) => {
acc.items[curr] = acc.items[curr] ? acc.items[curr] += 1 : 1
if (acc.items[curr] === 2) acc.dup.push(curr)
return acc
}, {
items: {},
dup: []
},
)
console.log(dup)
// ['hi', 'bye']

You can use filter method and indexOf() to get all the duplicate values
function duplicate(arr) {
return duplicateArray = arr.filter((item, index) => arr.indexOf(item) !== index)
}
arr.indexOf(item) will always return the first index at which a given element can be
found

ES5 only (i.e., it needs a filter() polyfill for IE8 and below):
var arrayToFilter = [ 4, 5, 5, 5, 2, 1, 3, 1, 1, 2, 1, 3 ];
arrayToFilter.
sort().
filter( function(me,i,arr){
return (i===0) || ( me !== arr[i-1] );
});

Here is a very light and easy way:
var codes = dc_1.split(',');
var i = codes.length;
while (i--) {
if (codes.indexOf(codes[i]) != i) {
codes.splice(i,1);
}
}

ES6 offers the Set data structure which is basically an array that doesn't accept duplicates.
With the Set data structure, there's a very easy way to find duplicates in an array (using only one loop).
Here's my code
function findDuplicate(arr) {
var set = new Set();
var duplicates = new Set();
for (let i = 0; i< arr.length; i++) {
var size = set.size;
set.add(arr[i]);
if (set.size === size) {
duplicates.add(arr[i]);
}
}
return duplicates;
}

With ES6 (or using Babel or Typescipt) you can simply do:
var duplicates = myArray.filter(i => myArray.filter(ii => ii === i).length > 1);
https://es6console.com/j58euhbt/

Simple code with ES6 syntax (return sorted array of duplicates):
let duplicates = a => {d=[]; a.sort((a,b) => a-b).reduce((a,b)=>{a==b&&!d.includes(a)&&d.push(a); return b}); return d};
How to use:
duplicates([1,2,3,10,10,2,3,3,10]);

I have just figured out a simple way to achieve this using an Array filter
var list = [9, 9, 111, 2, 3, 4, 4, 5, 7];
// Filter 1: to find all duplicates elements
var duplicates = list.filter(function(value,index,self) {
return self.indexOf(value) !== self.lastIndexOf(value) && self.indexOf(value) === index;
});
console.log(duplicates);

This answer might also be helpful, it leverages js reduce operator/method to remove duplicates from array.
const result = [1, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3].reduce((x, y) => x.includes(y) ? x : [...x, y], []);
console.log(result);

Higher ranked answers have a few inherent issues including the use of legacy javascript, incorrect ordering or with only support for 2 duplicated items.
Here's a modern solution which fixes those problems:
const arrayNonUniq = array => {
if (!Array.isArray(array)) {
throw new TypeError("An array must be provided!")
}
return array.filter((value, index) => array.indexOf(value) === index && array.lastIndexOf(value) !== index)
}
arrayNonUniq([1, 1, 2, 3, 3])
//=> [1, 3]
arrayNonUniq(["foo", "foo", "bar", "foo"])
//=> ['foo']
You can also use the npm package array-non-uniq.

The following function (a variation of the eliminateDuplicates function already mentioned) seems to do the trick, returning test2,1,7,5 for the input ["test", "test2", "test2", 1, 1, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 7, 10, 22, 43, 1, 5, 8]
Note that the problem is stranger in JavaScript than in most other languages, because a JavaScript array can hold just about anything. Note that solutions that use sorting might need to provide an appropriate sorting function--I haven't tried that route yet.
This particular implementation works for (at least) strings and numbers.
function findDuplicates(arr) {
var i,
len=arr.length,
out=[],
obj={};
for (i=0;i<len;i++) {
if (obj[arr[i]] != null) {
if (!obj[arr[i]]) {
out.push(arr[i]);
obj[arr[i]] = 1;
}
} else {
obj[arr[i]] = 0;
}
}
return out;
}

var arr = [2, 1, 2, 2, 4, 4, 2, 5];
function returnDuplicates(arr) {
return arr.reduce(function(dupes, val, i) {
if (arr.indexOf(val) !== i && dupes.indexOf(val) === -1) {
dupes.push(val);
}
return dupes;
}, []);
}
alert(returnDuplicates(arr));
This function avoids the sorting step and uses the reduce() method to push duplicates to a new array if it doesn't already exist in it.