Related
I have a target array ["apple","banana","orange"], and I want to check if other arrays contain any one of the target array elements.
For example:
["apple","grape"] //returns true;
["apple","banana","pineapple"] //returns true;
["grape", "pineapple"] //returns false;
How can I do it in JavaScript?
Vanilla JS
ES2016:
const found = arr1.some(r=> arr2.includes(r))
ES6:
const found = arr1.some(r=> arr2.indexOf(r) >= 0)
How it works
some(..) checks each element of the array against a test function and returns true if any element of the array passes the test function, otherwise, it returns false. indexOf(..) >= 0 and includes(..) both return true if the given argument is present in the array.
vanilla js
/**
* #description determine if an array contains one or more items from another array.
* #param {array} haystack the array to search.
* #param {array} arr the array providing items to check for in the haystack.
* #return {boolean} true|false if haystack contains at least one item from arr.
*/
var findOne = function (haystack, arr) {
return arr.some(function (v) {
return haystack.indexOf(v) >= 0;
});
};
As noted by #loganfsmyth you can shorten it in ES2016 to
/**
* #description determine if an array contains one or more items from another array.
* #param {array} haystack the array to search.
* #param {array} arr the array providing items to check for in the haystack.
* #return {boolean} true|false if haystack contains at least one item from arr.
*/
const findOne = (haystack, arr) => {
return arr.some(v => haystack.includes(v));
};
or simply as arr.some(v => haystack.includes(v));
If you want to determine if the array has all the items from the other array, replace some() to every()
or as arr.every(v => haystack.includes(v));
ES6 solution:
let arr1 = [1, 2, 3];
let arr2 = [2, 3];
let isFounded = arr1.some( ai => arr2.includes(ai) );
Unlike of it: Must contains all values.
let allFounded = arr2.every( ai => arr1.includes(ai) );
Hope, will be helpful.
If you're not opposed to using a libray, http://underscorejs.org/ has an intersection method, which can simplify this:
var _ = require('underscore');
var target = [ 'apple', 'orange', 'banana'];
var fruit2 = [ 'apple', 'orange', 'mango'];
var fruit3 = [ 'mango', 'lemon', 'pineapple'];
var fruit4 = [ 'orange', 'lemon', 'grapes'];
console.log(_.intersection(target, fruit2)); //returns [apple, orange]
console.log(_.intersection(target, fruit3)); //returns []
console.log(_.intersection(target, fruit4)); //returns [orange]
The intersection function will return a new array with the items that it matched and if not matches it returns empty array.
ES6 (fastest)
const a = ['a', 'b', 'c'];
const b = ['c', 'a', 'd'];
a.some(v=> b.indexOf(v) !== -1)
ES2016
const a = ['a', 'b', 'c'];
const b = ['c', 'a', 'd'];
a.some(v => b.includes(v));
Underscore
const a = ['a', 'b', 'c'];
const b = ['c', 'a', 'd'];
_.intersection(a, b)
DEMO: https://jsfiddle.net/r257wuv5/
jsPerf: https://jsperf.com/array-contains-any-element-of-another-array
If you don't need type coercion (because of the use of indexOf), you could try something like the following:
var arr = [1, 2, 3];
var check = [3, 4];
var found = false;
for (var i = 0; i < check.length; i++) {
if (arr.indexOf(check[i]) > -1) {
found = true;
break;
}
}
console.log(found);
Where arr contains the target items. At the end, found will show if the second array had at least one match against the target.
Of course, you can swap out numbers for anything you want to use - strings are fine, like your example.
And in my specific example, the result should be true because the second array's 3 exists in the target.
UPDATE:
Here's how I'd organize it into a function (with some minor changes from before):
var anyMatchInArray = (function () {
"use strict";
var targetArray, func;
targetArray = ["apple", "banana", "orange"];
func = function (checkerArray) {
var found = false;
for (var i = 0, j = checkerArray.length; !found && i < j; i++) {
if (targetArray.indexOf(checkerArray[i]) > -1) {
found = true;
}
}
return found;
};
return func;
}());
DEMO: http://jsfiddle.net/u8Bzt/
In this case, the function could be modified to have targetArray be passed in as an argument instead of hardcoded in the closure.
UPDATE2:
While my solution above may work and be (hopefully more) readable, I believe the "better" way to handle the concept I described is to do something a little differently. The "problem" with the above solution is that the indexOf inside the loop causes the target array to be looped over completely for every item in the other array. This can easily be "fixed" by using a "lookup" (a map...a JavaScript object literal). This allows two simple loops, over each array. Here's an example:
var anyMatchInArray = function (target, toMatch) {
"use strict";
var found, targetMap, i, j, cur;
found = false;
targetMap = {};
// Put all values in the `target` array into a map, where
// the keys are the values from the array
for (i = 0, j = target.length; i < j; i++) {
cur = target[i];
targetMap[cur] = true;
}
// Loop over all items in the `toMatch` array and see if any of
// their values are in the map from before
for (i = 0, j = toMatch.length; !found && (i < j); i++) {
cur = toMatch[i];
found = !!targetMap[cur];
// If found, `targetMap[cur]` will return true, otherwise it
// will return `undefined`...that's what the `!!` is for
}
return found;
};
DEMO: http://jsfiddle.net/5Lv9v/
The downside to this solution is that only numbers and strings (and booleans) can be used (correctly), because the values are (implicitly) converted to strings and set as the keys to the lookup map. This isn't exactly good/possible/easily done for non-literal values.
Using filter/indexOf:
function containsAny(source,target)
{
var result = source.filter(function(item){ return target.indexOf(item) > -1});
return (result.length > 0);
}
//results
var fruits = ["apple","banana","orange"];
console.log(containsAny(fruits,["apple","grape"]));
console.log(containsAny(fruits,["apple","banana","pineapple"]));
console.log(containsAny(fruits,["grape", "pineapple"]));
You could use lodash and do:
_.intersection(originalTarget, arrayToCheck).length > 0
Set intersection is done on both collections producing an array of identical elements.
const areCommonElements = (arr1, arr2) => {
const arr2Set = new Set(arr2);
return arr1.some(el => arr2Set.has(el));
};
Or you can even have a better performance if you first find out which of these two arrays is longer and making Set out for the longest array, while applying some method on the shortest one:
const areCommonElements = (arr1, arr2) => {
const [shortArr, longArr] = (arr1.length < arr2.length) ? [arr1, arr2] : [arr2, arr1];
const longArrSet = new Set(longArr);
return shortArr.some(el => longArrSet.has(el));
};
I wrote 3 solutions. Essentially they do the same. They return true as soon as they get true. I wrote the 3 solutions just for showing 3 different way to do things. Now, it depends what you like more. You can use performance.now() to check the performance of one solution or the other. In my solutions I'm also checking which array is the biggest and which one is the smallest to make the operations more efficient.
The 3rd solution may not be the cutest but is efficient. I decided to add it because in some coding interviews you are not allowed to use built-in methods.
Lastly, sure...we can come up with a solution with 2 NESTED for loops (the brute force way) but you want to avoid that because the time complexity is bad O(n^2).
Note:
instead of using .includes() like some other people did, you can use
.indexOf(). if you do just check if the value is bigger than 0. If
the value doesn't exist will give you -1. if it does exist, it will give you
greater than 0.
indexOf() vs includes()
Which one has better performance? indexOf() for a little bit, but includes is more readable in my opinion.
If I'm not mistaken .includes() and indexOf() use loops behind the scene, so you will be at O(n^2) when using them with .some().
USING loop
const compareArraysWithIncludes = (arr1, arr2) => {
const [smallArray, bigArray] =
arr1.length < arr2.length ? [arr1, arr2] : [arr2, arr1];
for (let i = 0; i < smallArray.length; i++) {
return bigArray.includes(smallArray[i]);
}
return false;
};
USING .some()
const compareArraysWithSome = (arr1, arr2) => {
const [smallArray, bigArray] =
arr1.length < arr2.length ? [arr1, arr2] : [arr2, arr1];
return smallArray.some(c => bigArray.includes(c));
};
USING MAPS Time complexity O(2n)=>O(n)
const compararArraysUsingObjs = (arr1, arr2) => {
const map = {};
const [smallArray, bigArray] =
arr1.length < arr2.length ? [arr1, arr2] : [arr2, arr1];
for (let i = 0; i < smallArray.length; i++) {
if (!map[smallArray[i]]) {
map[smallArray[i]] = true;
}
}
for (let i = 0; i < bigArray.length; i++) {
if (map[bigArray[i]]) {
return true;
}
}
return false;
};
Code in my:
stackblitz
I'm not an expert in performance nor BigO so if something that I said is wrong let me know.
You can use a nested Array.prototype.some call. This has the benefit that it will bail at the first match instead of other solutions that will run through the full nested loop.
eg.
var arr = [1, 2, 3];
var match = [2, 4];
var hasMatch = arr.some(a => match.some(m => a === m));
I found this short and sweet syntax to match all or some elements between two arrays. For example
// OR operation. find if any of array2 elements exists in array1. This will return as soon as there is a first match as some method breaks when function returns TRUE
let array1 = ['a', 'b', 'c', 'd', 'e'], array2 = ['a', 'b'];
console.log(array2.some(ele => array1.includes(ele)));
// prints TRUE
// AND operation. find if all of array2 elements exists in array1. This will return as soon as there is a no first match as some method breaks when function returns TRUE
let array1 = ['a', 'b', 'c', 'd', 'e'], array2 = ['a', 'x'];
console.log(!array2.some(ele => !array1.includes(ele)));
// prints FALSE
Hope that helps someone in future!
Just one more solution
var a1 = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
var a2 = [2, 4]
Check if a1 contain all element of a2
var result = a1.filter(e => a2.indexOf(e) !== -1).length === a2.length
console.log(result)
What about using a combination of some/findIndex and indexOf?
So something like this:
var array1 = ["apple","banana","orange"];
var array2 = ["grape", "pineapple"];
var found = array1.some(function(v) { return array2.indexOf(v) != -1; });
To make it more readable you could add this functionality to the Array object itself.
Array.prototype.indexOfAny = function (array) {
return this.findIndex(function(v) { return array.indexOf(v) != -1; });
}
Array.prototype.containsAny = function (array) {
return this.indexOfAny(array) != -1;
}
Note: If you'd want to do something with a predicate you could replace the inner indexOf with another findIndex and a predicate
Here is an interesting case I thought I should share.
Let's say that you have an array of objects and an array of selected filters.
let arr = [
{ id: 'x', tags: ['foo'] },
{ id: 'y', tags: ['foo', 'bar'] },
{ id: 'z', tags: ['baz'] }
];
const filters = ['foo'];
To apply the selected filters to this structure we can
if (filters.length > 0)
arr = arr.filter(obj =>
obj.tags.some(tag => filters.includes(tag))
);
// [
// { id: 'x', tags: ['foo'] },
// { id: 'y', tags: ['foo', 'bar'] }
// ]
Good perfomance solution:
We should transform one of arrays to object.
const contains = (arr1, mainObj) => arr1.some(el => el in mainObj);
const includes = (arr1, mainObj) => arr1.every(el => el in mainObj);
Usage:
const mainList = ["apple", "banana", "orange"];
// We make object from array, you can use your solution to make it
const main = Object.fromEntries(mainList.map(key => [key, true]));
contains(["apple","grape"], main) // => true
contains(["apple","banana","pineapple"], main) // => true
contains(["grape", "pineapple"], main) // => false
includes(["apple", "grape"], main) // => false
includes(["banana", "apple"], main) // => true
you can face with some disadvantage of checking by in operator (eg 'toString' in {} // => true), so you can change solution to obj[key] checker
Adding to Array Prototype
Disclaimer: Many would strongly advise against this. The only time it'd really be a problem was if a library added a prototype function with the same name (that behaved differently) or something like that.
Code:
Array.prototype.containsAny = function(arr) {
return this.some(
(v) => (arr.indexOf(v) >= 0)
)
}
Without using big arrow functions:
Array.prototype.containsAny = function(arr) {
return this.some(function (v) {
return arr.indexOf(v) >= 0
})
}
Usage
var a = ["a","b"]
console.log(a.containsAny(["b","z"])) // Outputs true
console.log(a.containsAny(["z"])) // Outputs false
My solution applies Array.prototype.some() and Array.prototype.includes() array helpers which do their job pretty efficient as well
ES6
const originalFruits = ["apple","banana","orange"];
const fruits1 = ["apple","banana","pineapple"];
const fruits2 = ["grape", "pineapple"];
const commonFruits = (myFruitsArr, otherFruitsArr) => {
return myFruitsArr.some(fruit => otherFruitsArr.includes(fruit))
}
console.log(commonFruits(originalFruits, fruits1)) //returns true;
console.log(commonFruits(originalFruits, fruits2)) //returns false;
When I looked at your answers, I could not find the answer I wanted.
I did something myself and I want to share this with you.
It will be true only if the words entered (array) are correct.
function contains(a,b) {
let counter = 0;
for(var i = 0; i < b.length; i++) {;
if(a.includes(b[i])) counter++;
}
if(counter === b.length) return true;
return false;
}
let main_array = ['foo','bar','baz'];
let sub_array_a = ['foo','foobar'];
let sub_array_b = ['foo','bar'];
console.log(contains(main_array, sub_array_a)); // returns false
console.log(contains(main_array,sub_array_b )); // returns true
Array .filter() with a nested call to .find() will return all elements in the first array that are members of the second array. Check the length of the returned array to determine if any of the second array were in the first array.
getCommonItems(firstArray, secondArray) {
return firstArray.filter((firstArrayItem) => {
return secondArray.find((secondArrayItem) => {
return firstArrayItem === secondArrayItem;
});
});
}
It can be done by simply iterating across the main array and check whether other array contains any of the target element or not.
Try this:
function Check(A) {
var myarr = ["apple", "banana", "orange"];
var i, j;
var totalmatches = 0;
for (i = 0; i < myarr.length; i++) {
for (j = 0; j < A.length; ++j) {
if (myarr[i] == A[j]) {
totalmatches++;
}
}
}
if (totalmatches > 0) {
return true;
} else {
return false;
}
}
var fruits1 = new Array("apple", "grape");
alert(Check(fruits1));
var fruits2 = new Array("apple", "banana", "pineapple");
alert(Check(fruits2));
var fruits3 = new Array("grape", "pineapple");
alert(Check(fruits3));
DEMO at JSFIDDLE
Not sure how efficient this might be in terms of performance, but this is what I use using array destructuring to keep everything nice and short:
const shareElements = (arr1, arr2) => {
const typeArr = [...arr1, ...arr2]
const typeSet = new Set(typeArr)
return typeArr.length > typeSet.size
}
Since sets cannot have duplicate elements while arrays can, combining both input arrays, converting it to a set, and comparing the set size and array length would tell you if they share any elements.
With underscorejs
var a1 = [1,2,3];
var a2 = [1,2];
_.every(a1, function(e){ return _.include(a2, e); } ); //=> false
_.every(a2, function(e){ return _.include(a1, e); } ); //=> true
Vanilla JS with partial matching & case insensitive
The problem with some previous approaches is that they require an exact match of every word. But, What if you want to provide results for partial matches?
function search(arrayToSearch, wordsToSearch) {
arrayToSearch.filter(v =>
wordsToSearch.every(w =>
v.toLowerCase().split(" ").
reduce((isIn, h) => isIn || String(h).indexOf(w) >= 0, false)
)
)
}
//Usage
var myArray = ["Attach tag", "Attaching tags", "Blah blah blah"];
var searchText = "Tag attach";
var searchArr = searchText.toLowerCase().split(" "); //["tag", "attach"]
var matches = search(myArray, searchArr);
//Will return
//["Attach tag", "Attaching tags"]
This is useful when you want to provide a search box where users type words and the results can have those words in any order, position and case.
Update #Paul Grimshaw answer, use includes insteed of indexOf for more readable
let found = arr1.some(r=> arr2.indexOf(r) >= 0)
let found = arr1.some(r=> arr2.includes(r))
A short way of writing this:
const found = arr1.some(arr2.includes)
I came up with a solution in node using underscore js like this:
var checkRole = _.intersection(['A','B'], ['A','B','C']);
if(!_.isEmpty(checkRole)) {
next();
}
You are looking for intersection between the two arrays. And you have two major intersection types: 'every' and 'some'. Let me give you good examples:
EVERY
let brands1 = ['Ford', 'Kia', 'VW', 'Audi'];
let brands2 = ['Audi', 'Kia'];
// Find 'every' brand intersection.
// Meaning all elements inside 'brands2' must be present in 'brands1':
let intersectionEvery = brands2.every( brand => brands1.includes(brand) );
if (intersectionEvery) {
const differenceList = brands1.filter(brand => !brands2.includes(brand));
console.log('difference list:', differenceList);
const commonList = brands1.filter(brand => brands2.includes(brand));
console.log('common list:', commonList);
}
If condition is not met (like if you put 'Mercedes' in brands2) then 'intersectionEvery' won't be satisfied - will be bool false.
If condition is met it will log ["Ford", "VW"] as difference and ["Kia", "Audi"] as common list.
Sandbox: https://jsfiddle.net/bqmg14t6/
SOME
let brands1 = ['Ford', 'Kia', 'VW', 'Audi'];
let brands2 = ['Audi', 'Kia', 'Mercedes', 'Land Rover'];
// Find 'some' brand intersection.
// Meaning some elements inside 'brands2' must be also present in 'brands1':
let intersectionSome = brands2.some( brand => brands1.includes(brand) );
if (intersectionSome) {
const differenceList = brands1.filter(brand => !brands2.includes(brand));
console.log('difference list:', differenceList);
const commonList = brands1.filter(brand => brands2.includes(brand));
console.log('common list:', commonList);
}
Here we are looking for some common brands, not necessarily all.
It will log ["Ford", "VW"] as difference and ["Kia", "Audi"] as common brands.
Sandbox: https://jsfiddle.net/zkq9j3Lh/
Personally, I would use the following function:
var arrayContains = function(array, toMatch) {
var arrayAsString = array.toString();
return (arrayAsString.indexOf(','+toMatch+',') >-1);
}
The "toString()" method will always use commas to separate the values. Will only really work with primitive types.
console.log("searching Array: "+finding_array);
console.log("searching in:"+reference_array);
var check_match_counter = 0;
for (var j = finding_array.length - 1; j >= 0; j--)
{
if(reference_array.indexOf(finding_array[j]) > 0)
{
check_match_counter = check_match_counter + 1;
}
}
var match = (check_match_counter > 0) ? true : false;
console.log("Final result:"+match);
I have a question of JS arrays.
Example:
var fullArr = [1,2,3,4];
var partArr = [2,3];
var newArr = [];
We have a main array fullArr and a partial array partarr. I want to create a function/filter, which is looking for existing items in fullArr and not in partArr.
In this example above newArr must be equal to [1,4].
I've tried doing something like this, but it's not working properly.
for (var k in fullArray) { // [1,2,3,4]
for (var j in selectedArray) { // [1,4]
if (fullArray[k] == selectedArray[j]) {
newArray.splice(selectedArray[j] - 1, 1); // must be [2,3]
break;
}
}
}
What is a good way of making this? Thanks.
Here's one
var newArr = fullArr.filter(function(f) { // The filter() method creates a new array with all elements that pass the test implemented by the provided function.
return partArr.indexOf(f) == -1; // The indexOf() method returns the first index at which a given element can be found in the array, or -1 if it is not present.
})
to impress the girls, you can also
var newArr = fullArr.filter(function(f) {
return !~partArr.indexOf(f);
})
Here is the code for your requirement.
var fullArr = [1,2,3,4];
var partArr = [2,3];
var newArr = [];
for(var i=0;i<fullArr.length;i++){
if(partArr.indexOf(fullArr[i]) == -1)
newArr.push(fullArr[i]);
};
Here is the working Link
Hope it works :)
In fact, you want a common part between arrays. Obviously you can choose splice or indexOf to have O(n * m) or even O(m * n^2) performance. It's obviously suboptimal for any array larger than few elements
Or you can use objects as hash maps to find differences in (in worst case) O(n + m log m):
var fullArr = [1,2,3,4];
var partArr = [2,3];
var temporaryObject = Object.create(null);
partArr.forEach(el=>temporaryObject[el] = true); // temporaryObject after this operation is {"2": true, "3": true}
var newArr = fullArr.filter(el=>temporaryObject[el]);
In this example I have used ES6 feature called "arrow functions". It translates to following ES5 code:
var partArr = [2, 3];
var temporaryObject = Object.create(null);
partArr.forEach(function (el) {
temporaryObject[el] = true;
}); // temporaryObject after this operation is {"2": true, "3": true}
var newArr = fullArr.filter(function (el) {
return temporaryObject[el];
});
You can use the filter() function that works on arrays:
var newArr = fullArr.filter(function(val, i, arr) {
return partArr.indexOf(val) === -1;
});
This will return a new array containing the values of every iteration that returns true.
Should you ever need to do this on an object in the future a great way is to first convert the object keys to an array and then run the filter:
Object.keys(myObj).function(val, i, arr) {
return partArr.indexOf(val) === -1;
});
Here are few other approaches:
var fullArr = [1,2,3,4];
var partArr = [2,3];
var newArr = [];
1.
fullArr.map(function(element){
if(partArr.indexOf(element) === -1) newArr.push(element);
})
console.log(newArr);
2.
for(i in fullArr){
if(partArr.indexOf(fullArr[i]) === -1) newArr.push(fullArr[i]);
}
console.log(newArr);
3.
fullArr.forEach(function(element){
if(partArr.indexOf(element) === -1) newArr.push(element);
})
console.log(newArr);
I am trying to determine if an array of JavaScript arrays contains duplicates. Is this possible? I am first trying to see if I can strip the duplicates out and then do an equality check but I cannot get past the first part. Here is what underscore returns:
var arr1 = [[1,2], [2,3], [1,2]];
var arr2 = _.uniq(arr1);
var arraysAreEqual = _.isEqual(arr1, arr2);
console.log(arraysAreEqual, arr1, arr2);
// true
Jsbin: http://jsbin.com/vogumo/1/edit?js,console
Anyone know of a way to determine if the array contains duplicate arrays?
It's a little sloppy, but (possible)
var arr2 = _.uniq(arr1, function(item) {
return JSON.stringify(item);
});
will give you a correct result
Try This:
var numArray = [1, 7, 3, 0, 9, 7, 8, 6, 2, 3];
var duplicates = [];
var sortednumArray = numArray.sort();
for (var i = 0; i < sortednumArray.length; i++) {
//console.log(sortednumArray[i]);
if (sortednumArray[i] == sortednumArray[i + 1]) {
duplicates.push(sortednumArray[i]);
}
}
if (duplicates.length == 0) {
console.log("Soted Array:");
for(var i = 0; i < sortednumArray.length; i++) {
console.log(sortednumArray[i]);
}
} else {
console.log("Duplicates:");
for(var i = 0; i < duplicates.length; i++){
console.log(duplicates[i]);
}
}
Program pushes all duplicates to an array called 'duplicates' then displays it, but if none are present, it displays the sorted version of numArray
From the underscore.js documentation:
uniq _.uniq(array, [isSorted], [iteratee]) Alias: unique
Produces a
duplicate-free version of the array, using === to test object
equality. If you know in advance that the array is sorted, passing
true for isSorted will run a much faster algorithm. If you want to
compute unique items based on a transformation, pass an iteratee
function.
But arrays can't be strictly compared in JavaScript.
Therefore, you can use a transformation function to enable comparison with uniq. For example:
console.log([1,2] === [1,2]) // false, can't strict compare arrays
console.log([1,2].toString()) // "1,2" - string representation
console.log([1,2].toString() === [1,2].toString()) // true, strings can be compared
var valueToString = function(v) {return v.toString()}; // transform array to string
var arr1 = [[1,2], [2,3], [1,2]];
var arr2 = _.uniq(arr1, false, valueToString); // compare based on transformation
var arraysAreEqual = _.isEqual(arr1, arr2);
console.log("arraysAreEqual:", arraysAreEqual, arr1, arr2);
// false
// [[1, 2], [2, 3], [1, 2]]
// [[1, 2], [2, 3]]
Note that transforming to string is "hacky": you would be better off comparing each value of the array, as discussed in this StackOverflow question.
By using the proposed equals implementation in that question, you would need to implement your own version of uniq that uses equals instead of ===.
The implementation of uniq in Underscore is very straight-forward - it creates a new result array and loops through the given array. If the current value is not already in result, insert it.
console.log("Using array comparison:");
arrayEquals = function (array1, array2) {
// if any array is a falsy value, return
if (!array1 || !array2)
return false;
// compare lengths - can save a lot of time
if (array1.length != array2.length)
return false;
for (var i = 0, l=array1.length; i < l; i++) {
// Check if we have nested arrays
if (array1[i] instanceof Array && array2[i] instanceof Array) {
// recurse into the nested arrays
if (!arrayEquals(array1[i],array2[i]))
return false;
}
else if (array1[i] !== array2[i]) {
return false;
}
}
return true;
};
_.uniqArrays = function(array) {
if (array == null) return [];
var result = [];
for (var i = 0, length = array.length; i < length; i++) {
var value = array[i];
var arrayEqualsToValue = arrayEquals.bind(this, value); // arrayEquals with first argument set to value
var existing = _.find(result, arrayEqualsToValue); // did we already find this?
if (!existing) {
result.push(value);
}
}
return result;
};
var arr3 = _.uniqArrays(arr1);
arraysAreEqual = _.isEqual(arr1, arr3);
console.log("arraysAreEqual:", arraysAreEqual, arr1, arr3); // false
I made a jsbin with all the code, if you want to play around.
In the latest lodash (4.6.1) you could do something like this:
if (_.uniqWith(arr, _.isEqual).length < arr.length) {
// then there were duplicates
}
I have a target array ["apple","banana","orange"], and I want to check if other arrays contain any one of the target array elements.
For example:
["apple","grape"] //returns true;
["apple","banana","pineapple"] //returns true;
["grape", "pineapple"] //returns false;
How can I do it in JavaScript?
Vanilla JS
ES2016:
const found = arr1.some(r=> arr2.includes(r))
ES6:
const found = arr1.some(r=> arr2.indexOf(r) >= 0)
How it works
some(..) checks each element of the array against a test function and returns true if any element of the array passes the test function, otherwise, it returns false. indexOf(..) >= 0 and includes(..) both return true if the given argument is present in the array.
vanilla js
/**
* #description determine if an array contains one or more items from another array.
* #param {array} haystack the array to search.
* #param {array} arr the array providing items to check for in the haystack.
* #return {boolean} true|false if haystack contains at least one item from arr.
*/
var findOne = function (haystack, arr) {
return arr.some(function (v) {
return haystack.indexOf(v) >= 0;
});
};
As noted by #loganfsmyth you can shorten it in ES2016 to
/**
* #description determine if an array contains one or more items from another array.
* #param {array} haystack the array to search.
* #param {array} arr the array providing items to check for in the haystack.
* #return {boolean} true|false if haystack contains at least one item from arr.
*/
const findOne = (haystack, arr) => {
return arr.some(v => haystack.includes(v));
};
or simply as arr.some(v => haystack.includes(v));
If you want to determine if the array has all the items from the other array, replace some() to every()
or as arr.every(v => haystack.includes(v));
ES6 solution:
let arr1 = [1, 2, 3];
let arr2 = [2, 3];
let isFounded = arr1.some( ai => arr2.includes(ai) );
Unlike of it: Must contains all values.
let allFounded = arr2.every( ai => arr1.includes(ai) );
Hope, will be helpful.
If you're not opposed to using a libray, http://underscorejs.org/ has an intersection method, which can simplify this:
var _ = require('underscore');
var target = [ 'apple', 'orange', 'banana'];
var fruit2 = [ 'apple', 'orange', 'mango'];
var fruit3 = [ 'mango', 'lemon', 'pineapple'];
var fruit4 = [ 'orange', 'lemon', 'grapes'];
console.log(_.intersection(target, fruit2)); //returns [apple, orange]
console.log(_.intersection(target, fruit3)); //returns []
console.log(_.intersection(target, fruit4)); //returns [orange]
The intersection function will return a new array with the items that it matched and if not matches it returns empty array.
ES6 (fastest)
const a = ['a', 'b', 'c'];
const b = ['c', 'a', 'd'];
a.some(v=> b.indexOf(v) !== -1)
ES2016
const a = ['a', 'b', 'c'];
const b = ['c', 'a', 'd'];
a.some(v => b.includes(v));
Underscore
const a = ['a', 'b', 'c'];
const b = ['c', 'a', 'd'];
_.intersection(a, b)
DEMO: https://jsfiddle.net/r257wuv5/
jsPerf: https://jsperf.com/array-contains-any-element-of-another-array
If you don't need type coercion (because of the use of indexOf), you could try something like the following:
var arr = [1, 2, 3];
var check = [3, 4];
var found = false;
for (var i = 0; i < check.length; i++) {
if (arr.indexOf(check[i]) > -1) {
found = true;
break;
}
}
console.log(found);
Where arr contains the target items. At the end, found will show if the second array had at least one match against the target.
Of course, you can swap out numbers for anything you want to use - strings are fine, like your example.
And in my specific example, the result should be true because the second array's 3 exists in the target.
UPDATE:
Here's how I'd organize it into a function (with some minor changes from before):
var anyMatchInArray = (function () {
"use strict";
var targetArray, func;
targetArray = ["apple", "banana", "orange"];
func = function (checkerArray) {
var found = false;
for (var i = 0, j = checkerArray.length; !found && i < j; i++) {
if (targetArray.indexOf(checkerArray[i]) > -1) {
found = true;
}
}
return found;
};
return func;
}());
DEMO: http://jsfiddle.net/u8Bzt/
In this case, the function could be modified to have targetArray be passed in as an argument instead of hardcoded in the closure.
UPDATE2:
While my solution above may work and be (hopefully more) readable, I believe the "better" way to handle the concept I described is to do something a little differently. The "problem" with the above solution is that the indexOf inside the loop causes the target array to be looped over completely for every item in the other array. This can easily be "fixed" by using a "lookup" (a map...a JavaScript object literal). This allows two simple loops, over each array. Here's an example:
var anyMatchInArray = function (target, toMatch) {
"use strict";
var found, targetMap, i, j, cur;
found = false;
targetMap = {};
// Put all values in the `target` array into a map, where
// the keys are the values from the array
for (i = 0, j = target.length; i < j; i++) {
cur = target[i];
targetMap[cur] = true;
}
// Loop over all items in the `toMatch` array and see if any of
// their values are in the map from before
for (i = 0, j = toMatch.length; !found && (i < j); i++) {
cur = toMatch[i];
found = !!targetMap[cur];
// If found, `targetMap[cur]` will return true, otherwise it
// will return `undefined`...that's what the `!!` is for
}
return found;
};
DEMO: http://jsfiddle.net/5Lv9v/
The downside to this solution is that only numbers and strings (and booleans) can be used (correctly), because the values are (implicitly) converted to strings and set as the keys to the lookup map. This isn't exactly good/possible/easily done for non-literal values.
Using filter/indexOf:
function containsAny(source,target)
{
var result = source.filter(function(item){ return target.indexOf(item) > -1});
return (result.length > 0);
}
//results
var fruits = ["apple","banana","orange"];
console.log(containsAny(fruits,["apple","grape"]));
console.log(containsAny(fruits,["apple","banana","pineapple"]));
console.log(containsAny(fruits,["grape", "pineapple"]));
You could use lodash and do:
_.intersection(originalTarget, arrayToCheck).length > 0
Set intersection is done on both collections producing an array of identical elements.
const areCommonElements = (arr1, arr2) => {
const arr2Set = new Set(arr2);
return arr1.some(el => arr2Set.has(el));
};
Or you can even have a better performance if you first find out which of these two arrays is longer and making Set out for the longest array, while applying some method on the shortest one:
const areCommonElements = (arr1, arr2) => {
const [shortArr, longArr] = (arr1.length < arr2.length) ? [arr1, arr2] : [arr2, arr1];
const longArrSet = new Set(longArr);
return shortArr.some(el => longArrSet.has(el));
};
I wrote 3 solutions. Essentially they do the same. They return true as soon as they get true. I wrote the 3 solutions just for showing 3 different way to do things. Now, it depends what you like more. You can use performance.now() to check the performance of one solution or the other. In my solutions I'm also checking which array is the biggest and which one is the smallest to make the operations more efficient.
The 3rd solution may not be the cutest but is efficient. I decided to add it because in some coding interviews you are not allowed to use built-in methods.
Lastly, sure...we can come up with a solution with 2 NESTED for loops (the brute force way) but you want to avoid that because the time complexity is bad O(n^2).
Note:
instead of using .includes() like some other people did, you can use
.indexOf(). if you do just check if the value is bigger than 0. If
the value doesn't exist will give you -1. if it does exist, it will give you
greater than 0.
indexOf() vs includes()
Which one has better performance? indexOf() for a little bit, but includes is more readable in my opinion.
If I'm not mistaken .includes() and indexOf() use loops behind the scene, so you will be at O(n^2) when using them with .some().
USING loop
const compareArraysWithIncludes = (arr1, arr2) => {
const [smallArray, bigArray] =
arr1.length < arr2.length ? [arr1, arr2] : [arr2, arr1];
for (let i = 0; i < smallArray.length; i++) {
return bigArray.includes(smallArray[i]);
}
return false;
};
USING .some()
const compareArraysWithSome = (arr1, arr2) => {
const [smallArray, bigArray] =
arr1.length < arr2.length ? [arr1, arr2] : [arr2, arr1];
return smallArray.some(c => bigArray.includes(c));
};
USING MAPS Time complexity O(2n)=>O(n)
const compararArraysUsingObjs = (arr1, arr2) => {
const map = {};
const [smallArray, bigArray] =
arr1.length < arr2.length ? [arr1, arr2] : [arr2, arr1];
for (let i = 0; i < smallArray.length; i++) {
if (!map[smallArray[i]]) {
map[smallArray[i]] = true;
}
}
for (let i = 0; i < bigArray.length; i++) {
if (map[bigArray[i]]) {
return true;
}
}
return false;
};
Code in my:
stackblitz
I'm not an expert in performance nor BigO so if something that I said is wrong let me know.
You can use a nested Array.prototype.some call. This has the benefit that it will bail at the first match instead of other solutions that will run through the full nested loop.
eg.
var arr = [1, 2, 3];
var match = [2, 4];
var hasMatch = arr.some(a => match.some(m => a === m));
I found this short and sweet syntax to match all or some elements between two arrays. For example
// OR operation. find if any of array2 elements exists in array1. This will return as soon as there is a first match as some method breaks when function returns TRUE
let array1 = ['a', 'b', 'c', 'd', 'e'], array2 = ['a', 'b'];
console.log(array2.some(ele => array1.includes(ele)));
// prints TRUE
// AND operation. find if all of array2 elements exists in array1. This will return as soon as there is a no first match as some method breaks when function returns TRUE
let array1 = ['a', 'b', 'c', 'd', 'e'], array2 = ['a', 'x'];
console.log(!array2.some(ele => !array1.includes(ele)));
// prints FALSE
Hope that helps someone in future!
Just one more solution
var a1 = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
var a2 = [2, 4]
Check if a1 contain all element of a2
var result = a1.filter(e => a2.indexOf(e) !== -1).length === a2.length
console.log(result)
What about using a combination of some/findIndex and indexOf?
So something like this:
var array1 = ["apple","banana","orange"];
var array2 = ["grape", "pineapple"];
var found = array1.some(function(v) { return array2.indexOf(v) != -1; });
To make it more readable you could add this functionality to the Array object itself.
Array.prototype.indexOfAny = function (array) {
return this.findIndex(function(v) { return array.indexOf(v) != -1; });
}
Array.prototype.containsAny = function (array) {
return this.indexOfAny(array) != -1;
}
Note: If you'd want to do something with a predicate you could replace the inner indexOf with another findIndex and a predicate
Here is an interesting case I thought I should share.
Let's say that you have an array of objects and an array of selected filters.
let arr = [
{ id: 'x', tags: ['foo'] },
{ id: 'y', tags: ['foo', 'bar'] },
{ id: 'z', tags: ['baz'] }
];
const filters = ['foo'];
To apply the selected filters to this structure we can
if (filters.length > 0)
arr = arr.filter(obj =>
obj.tags.some(tag => filters.includes(tag))
);
// [
// { id: 'x', tags: ['foo'] },
// { id: 'y', tags: ['foo', 'bar'] }
// ]
Good perfomance solution:
We should transform one of arrays to object.
const contains = (arr1, mainObj) => arr1.some(el => el in mainObj);
const includes = (arr1, mainObj) => arr1.every(el => el in mainObj);
Usage:
const mainList = ["apple", "banana", "orange"];
// We make object from array, you can use your solution to make it
const main = Object.fromEntries(mainList.map(key => [key, true]));
contains(["apple","grape"], main) // => true
contains(["apple","banana","pineapple"], main) // => true
contains(["grape", "pineapple"], main) // => false
includes(["apple", "grape"], main) // => false
includes(["banana", "apple"], main) // => true
you can face with some disadvantage of checking by in operator (eg 'toString' in {} // => true), so you can change solution to obj[key] checker
Adding to Array Prototype
Disclaimer: Many would strongly advise against this. The only time it'd really be a problem was if a library added a prototype function with the same name (that behaved differently) or something like that.
Code:
Array.prototype.containsAny = function(arr) {
return this.some(
(v) => (arr.indexOf(v) >= 0)
)
}
Without using big arrow functions:
Array.prototype.containsAny = function(arr) {
return this.some(function (v) {
return arr.indexOf(v) >= 0
})
}
Usage
var a = ["a","b"]
console.log(a.containsAny(["b","z"])) // Outputs true
console.log(a.containsAny(["z"])) // Outputs false
My solution applies Array.prototype.some() and Array.prototype.includes() array helpers which do their job pretty efficient as well
ES6
const originalFruits = ["apple","banana","orange"];
const fruits1 = ["apple","banana","pineapple"];
const fruits2 = ["grape", "pineapple"];
const commonFruits = (myFruitsArr, otherFruitsArr) => {
return myFruitsArr.some(fruit => otherFruitsArr.includes(fruit))
}
console.log(commonFruits(originalFruits, fruits1)) //returns true;
console.log(commonFruits(originalFruits, fruits2)) //returns false;
When I looked at your answers, I could not find the answer I wanted.
I did something myself and I want to share this with you.
It will be true only if the words entered (array) are correct.
function contains(a,b) {
let counter = 0;
for(var i = 0; i < b.length; i++) {;
if(a.includes(b[i])) counter++;
}
if(counter === b.length) return true;
return false;
}
let main_array = ['foo','bar','baz'];
let sub_array_a = ['foo','foobar'];
let sub_array_b = ['foo','bar'];
console.log(contains(main_array, sub_array_a)); // returns false
console.log(contains(main_array,sub_array_b )); // returns true
Array .filter() with a nested call to .find() will return all elements in the first array that are members of the second array. Check the length of the returned array to determine if any of the second array were in the first array.
getCommonItems(firstArray, secondArray) {
return firstArray.filter((firstArrayItem) => {
return secondArray.find((secondArrayItem) => {
return firstArrayItem === secondArrayItem;
});
});
}
It can be done by simply iterating across the main array and check whether other array contains any of the target element or not.
Try this:
function Check(A) {
var myarr = ["apple", "banana", "orange"];
var i, j;
var totalmatches = 0;
for (i = 0; i < myarr.length; i++) {
for (j = 0; j < A.length; ++j) {
if (myarr[i] == A[j]) {
totalmatches++;
}
}
}
if (totalmatches > 0) {
return true;
} else {
return false;
}
}
var fruits1 = new Array("apple", "grape");
alert(Check(fruits1));
var fruits2 = new Array("apple", "banana", "pineapple");
alert(Check(fruits2));
var fruits3 = new Array("grape", "pineapple");
alert(Check(fruits3));
DEMO at JSFIDDLE
Not sure how efficient this might be in terms of performance, but this is what I use using array destructuring to keep everything nice and short:
const shareElements = (arr1, arr2) => {
const typeArr = [...arr1, ...arr2]
const typeSet = new Set(typeArr)
return typeArr.length > typeSet.size
}
Since sets cannot have duplicate elements while arrays can, combining both input arrays, converting it to a set, and comparing the set size and array length would tell you if they share any elements.
A short way of writing this:
const found = arr1.some(arr2.includes)
With underscorejs
var a1 = [1,2,3];
var a2 = [1,2];
_.every(a1, function(e){ return _.include(a2, e); } ); //=> false
_.every(a2, function(e){ return _.include(a1, e); } ); //=> true
Vanilla JS with partial matching & case insensitive
The problem with some previous approaches is that they require an exact match of every word. But, What if you want to provide results for partial matches?
function search(arrayToSearch, wordsToSearch) {
arrayToSearch.filter(v =>
wordsToSearch.every(w =>
v.toLowerCase().split(" ").
reduce((isIn, h) => isIn || String(h).indexOf(w) >= 0, false)
)
)
}
//Usage
var myArray = ["Attach tag", "Attaching tags", "Blah blah blah"];
var searchText = "Tag attach";
var searchArr = searchText.toLowerCase().split(" "); //["tag", "attach"]
var matches = search(myArray, searchArr);
//Will return
//["Attach tag", "Attaching tags"]
This is useful when you want to provide a search box where users type words and the results can have those words in any order, position and case.
Update #Paul Grimshaw answer, use includes insteed of indexOf for more readable
let found = arr1.some(r=> arr2.indexOf(r) >= 0)
let found = arr1.some(r=> arr2.includes(r))
I came up with a solution in node using underscore js like this:
var checkRole = _.intersection(['A','B'], ['A','B','C']);
if(!_.isEmpty(checkRole)) {
next();
}
You are looking for intersection between the two arrays. And you have two major intersection types: 'every' and 'some'. Let me give you good examples:
EVERY
let brands1 = ['Ford', 'Kia', 'VW', 'Audi'];
let brands2 = ['Audi', 'Kia'];
// Find 'every' brand intersection.
// Meaning all elements inside 'brands2' must be present in 'brands1':
let intersectionEvery = brands2.every( brand => brands1.includes(brand) );
if (intersectionEvery) {
const differenceList = brands1.filter(brand => !brands2.includes(brand));
console.log('difference list:', differenceList);
const commonList = brands1.filter(brand => brands2.includes(brand));
console.log('common list:', commonList);
}
If condition is not met (like if you put 'Mercedes' in brands2) then 'intersectionEvery' won't be satisfied - will be bool false.
If condition is met it will log ["Ford", "VW"] as difference and ["Kia", "Audi"] as common list.
Sandbox: https://jsfiddle.net/bqmg14t6/
SOME
let brands1 = ['Ford', 'Kia', 'VW', 'Audi'];
let brands2 = ['Audi', 'Kia', 'Mercedes', 'Land Rover'];
// Find 'some' brand intersection.
// Meaning some elements inside 'brands2' must be also present in 'brands1':
let intersectionSome = brands2.some( brand => brands1.includes(brand) );
if (intersectionSome) {
const differenceList = brands1.filter(brand => !brands2.includes(brand));
console.log('difference list:', differenceList);
const commonList = brands1.filter(brand => brands2.includes(brand));
console.log('common list:', commonList);
}
Here we are looking for some common brands, not necessarily all.
It will log ["Ford", "VW"] as difference and ["Kia", "Audi"] as common brands.
Sandbox: https://jsfiddle.net/zkq9j3Lh/
Personally, I would use the following function:
var arrayContains = function(array, toMatch) {
var arrayAsString = array.toString();
return (arrayAsString.indexOf(','+toMatch+',') >-1);
}
The "toString()" method will always use commas to separate the values. Will only really work with primitive types.
console.log("searching Array: "+finding_array);
console.log("searching in:"+reference_array);
var check_match_counter = 0;
for (var j = finding_array.length - 1; j >= 0; j--)
{
if(reference_array.indexOf(finding_array[j]) > 0)
{
check_match_counter = check_match_counter + 1;
}
}
var match = (check_match_counter > 0) ? true : false;
console.log("Final result:"+match);
My problem is that i have to delete something out of an array. I found out how to delete something out of a listbox. But the problem is that the listbox is filled by an array. So if I don't delete the value (I deleted out of the listbox) out of the array. The value keeps coming back when you add a new item. BTW: I am new to php and javascript.
My code is:
function removeItem(veldnaam){
var geselecteerd = document.getElementById("lst"+veldnaam).selectedIndex;
var nieuweArray;
alert(geselecteerd);
alert(document.getElementById(veldnaam+'hidden').value);
For (var i = 0, i<= arr.lenght, i++) {
If (i= geselecteerd){
nieuweArray = arr.splice(i,1);
document.getElementById(veldnaam+'hidden').value = arr;
}}
document.getElementById("lst"+veldnaam).remove(geselecteerd);
}
Use the delete operator. I'm assuming you are using objects as associative arrays.
var arr = {
"hello": "world",
"foo": "bar"
}
delete arr["foo"]; // Removes item with key "foo"
You can delete elements in an array using the delete command. But it will just set the value to undefined.
var arr = ['h', 'e', 'l', 'l', 'o'];
delete arr[2];
arr => ['h', 'e', undefined, 'l', 'o'];
So it will not remove the item, and make a shorter array, the array will still have 5 elements (0 to 4), but the value has been deleted.
In the case of "associative" arrays, or objects: The property will get erased and it will no longer exist.
var obj = { 'first':'h', 'second':'e', 'third':'l'};
delete obj['first'];
obj => { 'second':'e', 'third':'l'};
Add the following code somewhere
// Array Remove - By John Resig (MIT Licensed)
Array.prototype.remove = function(from, to) {
var rest = this.slice((to || from) + 1 || this.length);
this.length = from < 0 ? this.length + from : from;
return this.push.apply(this, rest);
};
and call it like this:
// Remove the second item from the array
array.remove(1);
// Remove the second-to-last item from the array
array.remove(-2);
// Remove the second and third items from the array
array.remove(1,2);
// Remove the last and second-to-last items from the array
array.remove(-2,-1);
Article containing the code above and explanation: http://ejohn.org/blog/javascript-array-remove/
var geselecteerd = document.getElementById("lst"+veldnaam).selectedIndex;
var nieuweArray;
var teller = 0;
var oudeArray=document.getElementById(veldnaam+'hidden').value;
var tmpArr="";
nieuweArray=oudeArray.split(":");
for (i = 0; i<nieuweArray.length; i++){
if (!(i==geselecteerd)){
tmpArr = tmpArr+nieuweArray[i]+":";}
teller++;
}
tmpArr = tmpArr + ":";
tmpArr = tmpArr.replace("::","");
document.getElementById(veldnaam+'hidden').value = tmpArr;
document.getElementById("lst"+veldnaam).remove(geselecteerd);
}
This is my solution and it worked. Thanks for your help.