Related
i got stucked in a chalenge in codeFights.my code pass the simple test and fail in just 2 from five of hidden tests her is the chalenge instruction:
Ratiorg got statues of different sizes as a present from CodeMaster for his birthday, each statue having an non-negative integer size. Since he likes to make things perfect, he wants to arrange them from smallest to largest so that each statue will be bigger than the previous one exactly by 1. He may need some additional statues to be able to accomplish that. Help him figure out the minimum number of additional statues needed.
Example
For statues = [6, 2, 3, 8], the output should be
makeArrayConsecutive2(statues) = 3.
Ratiorg needs statues of sizes 4, 5 and 7.
Input/Output
[time limit] 4000ms (js)
[input] array.integer statues
An array of distinct non-negative integers.
Constraints:
1 ≤ statues.length ≤ 10,
0 ≤ statues[i] ≤ 20.
[output] integer
The minimal number of statues that need to be added to existing statues such that it contains every integer size from an interval [L, R] (for some L, R) and no other sizes.
and here is my code :
function makeArrayConsecutive2(statues) {
//range the table from min to max
var rang=statues.sort();
var some=0;
//if the table is one element
if(rang.length-1==0){
return 0;
}else{
//if the table contain more then one element
for(i=0;i<=rang.length-2;i++){
//add the deference of two consecutive position -1
//to find the number of missing numbers
some+=(rang[i+1]-rang[i]-1);
}
return some;
}
}
Everything is correct, except the sorting part.
You have used sort function to sort the array in increasing order
var rang = statues.sort();
But if sort function is not provided a compare function, it converts its elements in strings and then sort it in unicode order.
For eg: [2,1,11] will be sorted as [1,11,2] which will give undesired output.
Correct way is
var rang = statues.sort(function (a, b){
return (a - b)
});
SO THE LOGIC TO SOLVE THIS QUESTION IS:
Find the Smallest and Largest Element in Array.
Get the count of can say, difference of Largest and Smallest value of array in order to calculate, how many elements must be there to make it as a continuous array
. Like from 5 to 9, count of total elements must be 5 ( i.e.5,6,7,8,9) and also add 1 to the result to make count inclusive.
Find the Length of the Array
Subtract the count i.e. "difference of largest and smallest value " with the length of array
PYTHON CODE (For explanation):
def makeArrayConsecutive2(statues):
max_height = max(statues)
min_height = min(statues)
array_length = len(statues)
count_of_element = max_height - min_height + 1
# '1 ' is added to make it inclusive
return count_of_element-array_length
and Python one liner :
def makeArrayConsecutive2(statues):
return max(statues)-min(statues)-len(statues)+1
I agree with Deepak's Solution. The question is ready not about sorting but helping to figure out the minimum number of additional statues needed. You only need to get the max and min values.
int makeArrayConsecutive2(int[] statues)
{
int min=Integer.MAX_VALUE,max=-1;
for(int i=0;i<statues.length;i++)
{
if(statues[i] < min){ min = statues[i]; }
if(statues[i] > max){ max = statues[i]; }
}
return (max-min)+1 - statues.length;
}
Solution in typescript. Create a new array from the min and max from the status array using a for loop. Subtract new array length with status array length.
function makeArrayConsecutive2(statues: number[]): number {
let min = Math.min(...statues);
let max = Math.max(...statues);
let arr = [];
for (let i = min; i <= max; i++) {
arr.push(i);
}
return arr.length - statues.length;
}
function makeArrayConsecutive2(statues) {
const nums = [];
for (let i = Math.min(...statues); i <= Math.max(...statues); i++) {
if (!statues.includes(i)) {
nums.push(i);
}
}
return nums.length;
}
console.log(makeArrayConsecutive2([6, 2, 3, 8]))
Sorting (nlogn)is not required. Below is the solution in Java.
int makeArrayConsecutive2(int[] statues) {
int max = Integer.MIN_VALUE;
int min = Integer.MAX_VALUE;
for (int i = 0; i < statues.length; i++) {
max = Math.max(max, statues[i]);
min = Math.min(min, statues[i]);
}
return (max - min) + 1 - statues.length;
}
This Code works
var statues = [2, 3, 6, 8];
var newStatues = [];
Function declaration
function makeArrayConsecutive2(statues) {
statues.sort(function(a, b) { return a - b });
for(var i = statues[0]; i <= statues[statues.length-1]; i++) {
newStatues.push(i);
}
return console.log(newStatues.length - statues.length);
}
Function Calling
makeArrayConsecutive2(statues);
Best solution goes here in just O(1) complexity:
let n = statues.length;
let max = Math.max.apply(null, statues);
let min = Math.min.apply(null, statues);
return max - min - n + 1;
function makeArrayConsecutive2(statues) {
var rang = statues.sort(function (a, b){
return (a - b)
});
var some=0;
if(rang.length-1==0){
return 0;
}else{
for(i=0;i<=rang.length-2;i++){
some+=(rang[i+1]-rang[i]-1);
}
return some;
}
}
function makeArrayConsecutive2(statues) {
const n = statues.length;
const min = Math.min(...statues);
const max = Math.max(...statues);
return max - min - n + 1;
}
If we subtract the minimum from the maximum element, then we get the number of elements that should be in the final array. Now subtract the already existing number of elements from this amount and add 1, then we get the result we need - the number of missing elements
Just for fun in C#
static int makeArrayConsecutive2(int[] statues)
{
List<int> ConsecutiveNums = new List<int>();
for(int i = statues.Min(); i != statues.Max() + 1; i++)
ConsecutiveNums.Add(i);
return ConsecutiveNums.Count - statues.Length;
}
function makeArrayConsecutive2(statues) {
return Math.max(...statues) - Math.min(...statues) + 1 -(statues.length)
}
I don't think we need a Looping there, that's my solution
you can try using for loop and ternary operation by the following code
def makeArrayConsecutive2(statues):
count=0
for i in range (min(statues),max(statues)):
count=count+1 if i not in statues else count
return count
function makeArrayConsecutive2(statues) {
s = statues.sort(function(a, b){return a - b});
n = statues.length;
val = 0;
for (let i=0;i<n-1;i++) {
val += (Math.abs(s[i]-s[i+1]))-1;
}
return val;
}
sort(statues.begin(), statues.end());
int count = 0;
for(int i = 1;i<statues.size(); i++){
int diff = statues[i]-statues[i-1];
if(diff>1){
count+=diff-1;
}
}
return count;
Solution in PHP
function solution($statues) {
return max($statues) - min($statues) - count($statues) + 1;
}
PHP solution for question.
function solution($statues) {
sort($statues);
$missing = 0;
$lowest = min($statues);
$highest = max($statues);
$numbers = range($lowest, $highest);
foreach($numbers as $number){
if(!in_array($number, $statues)){
$missing++;
}
}
return $missing;
}
here is code in python
def solution(statues):
statues.sort()
c = 0
for i in range(len(statues)-1):
if statues[i+1]-statues[i] > 1:
c += statues[i+1]-statues[i] -1
return (c)
Suppose I have a value of 15.7784514, I want to display it 15.77 with no rounding.
var num = parseFloat(15.7784514);
document.write(num.toFixed(1)+"<br />");
document.write(num.toFixed(2)+"<br />");
document.write(num.toFixed(3)+"<br />");
document.write(num.toFixed(10));
Results in -
15.8
15.78
15.778
15.7784514000
How do I display 15.77?
Convert the number into a string, match the number up to the second decimal place:
function calc(theform) {
var num = theform.original.value, rounded = theform.rounded
var with2Decimals = num.toString().match(/^-?\d+(?:\.\d{0,2})?/)[0]
rounded.value = with2Decimals
}
<form onsubmit="return calc(this)">
Original number: <input name="original" type="text" onkeyup="calc(form)" onchange="calc(form)" />
<br />"Rounded" number: <input name="rounded" type="text" placeholder="readonly" readonly>
</form>
The toFixed method fails in some cases unlike toString, so be very careful with it.
Update 5 Nov 2016
New answer, always accurate
function toFixed(num, fixed) {
var re = new RegExp('^-?\\d+(?:\.\\d{0,' + (fixed || -1) + '})?');
return num.toString().match(re)[0];
}
As floating point math in javascript will always have edge cases, the previous solution will be accurate most of the time which is not good enough.
There are some solutions to this like num.toPrecision, BigDecimal.js, and accounting.js.
Yet, I believe that merely parsing the string will be the simplest and always accurate.
Basing the update on the well written regex from the accepted answer by #Gumbo, this new toFixed function will always work as expected.
Old answer, not always accurate.
Roll your own toFixed function:
function toFixed(num, fixed) {
fixed = fixed || 0;
fixed = Math.pow(10, fixed);
return Math.floor(num * fixed) / fixed;
}
Another single-line solution :
number = Math.trunc(number*100)/100
I used 100 because you want to truncate to the second digit, but a more flexible solution would be :
number = Math.trunc(number*Math.pow(10, digits))/Math.pow(10, digits)
where digits is the amount of decimal digits to keep.
See Math.trunc specs for details and browser compatibility.
I opted to write this instead to manually remove the remainder with strings so I don't have to deal with the math issues that come with numbers:
num = num.toString(); //If it's not already a String
num = num.slice(0, (num.indexOf("."))+3); //With 3 exposing the hundredths place
Number(num); //If you need it back as a Number
This will give you "15.77" with num = 15.7784514;
Update (Jan 2021)
Depending on its range, a number in javascript may be shown in scientific notation. For example, if you type 0.0000001 in the console, you may see it as 1e-7, whereas 0.000001 appears unchanged (0.000001).
If your application works on a range of numbers for which scientific notation is not involved, you can just ignore this update and use the original answer below.
This update is about adding a function that checks if the number is in scientific format and, if so, converts it into decimal format. Here I'm proposing this one, but you can use any other function that achieves the same goal, according to your application's needs:
function toFixed(x) {
if (Math.abs(x) < 1.0) {
let e = parseInt(x.toString().split('e-')[1]);
if (e) {
x *= Math.pow(10,e-1);
x = '0.' + (new Array(e)).join('0') + x.toString().substring(2);
}
} else {
let e = parseInt(x.toString().split('+')[1]);
if (e > 20) {
e -= 20;
x /= Math.pow(10,e);
x += (new Array(e+1)).join('0');
}
}
return x;
}
Now just apply that function to the parameter (that's the only change with respect to the original answer):
function toFixedTrunc(x, n) {
x = toFixed(x)
// From here on the code is the same than the original answer
const v = (typeof x === 'string' ? x : x.toString()).split('.');
if (n <= 0) return v[0];
let f = v[1] || '';
if (f.length > n) return `${v[0]}.${f.substr(0,n)}`;
while (f.length < n) f += '0';
return `${v[0]}.${f}`
}
This updated version addresses also a case mentioned in a comment:
toFixedTrunc(0.000000199, 2) => "0.00"
Again, choose what fits your application needs at best.
Original answer (October 2017)
General solution to truncate (no rounding) a number to the n-th decimal digit and convert it to a string with exactly n decimal digits, for any n≥0.
function toFixedTrunc(x, n) {
const v = (typeof x === 'string' ? x : x.toString()).split('.');
if (n <= 0) return v[0];
let f = v[1] || '';
if (f.length > n) return `${v[0]}.${f.substr(0,n)}`;
while (f.length < n) f += '0';
return `${v[0]}.${f}`
}
where x can be either a number (which gets converted into a string) or a string.
Here are some tests for n=2 (including the one requested by OP):
0 => 0.00
0.01 => 0.01
0.5839 => 0.58
0.999 => 0.99
1.01 => 1.01
2 => 2.00
2.551 => 2.55
2.99999 => 2.99
4.27 => 4.27
15.7784514 => 15.77
123.5999 => 123.59
And for some other values of n:
15.001097 => 15.0010 (n=4)
0.000003298 => 0.0000032 (n=7)
0.000003298257899 => 0.000003298257 (n=12)
parseInt is faster then Math.floor
function floorFigure(figure, decimals){
if (!decimals) decimals = 2;
var d = Math.pow(10,decimals);
return (parseInt(figure*d)/d).toFixed(decimals);
};
floorFigure(123.5999) => "123.59"
floorFigure(123.5999, 3) => "123.599"
num = 19.66752
f = num.toFixed(3).slice(0,-1)
alert(f)
This will return 19.66
Simple do this
number = parseInt(number * 100)/100;
Just truncate the digits:
function truncDigits(inputNumber, digits) {
const fact = 10 ** digits;
return Math.floor(inputNumber * fact) / fact;
}
This is not a safe alternative, as many others commented examples with numbers that turn into exponential notation, that scenery is not covered by this function
// typescript
// function formatLimitDecimals(value: number, decimals: number): number {
function formatLimitDecimals(value, decimals) {
const stringValue = value.toString();
if(stringValue.includes('e')) {
// TODO: remove exponential notation
throw 'invald number';
} else {
const [integerPart, decimalPart] = stringValue.split('.');
if(decimalPart) {
return +[integerPart, decimalPart.slice(0, decimals)].join('.')
} else {
return integerPart;
}
}
}
console.log(formatLimitDecimals(4.156, 2)); // 4.15
console.log(formatLimitDecimals(4.156, 8)); // 4.156
console.log(formatLimitDecimals(4.156, 0)); // 4
console.log(formatLimitDecimals(0, 4)); // 0
// not covered
console.log(formatLimitDecimals(0.000000199, 2)); // 0.00
These solutions do work, but to me seem unnecessarily complicated. I personally like to use the modulus operator to obtain the remainder of a division operation, and remove that. Assuming that num = 15.7784514:
num-=num%.01;
This is equivalent to saying num = num - (num % .01).
I fixed using following simple way-
var num = 15.7784514;
Math.floor(num*100)/100;
Results will be 15.77
My version for positive numbers:
function toFixed_norounding(n,p)
{
var result = n.toFixed(p);
return result <= n ? result: (result - Math.pow(0.1,p)).toFixed(p);
}
Fast, pretty, obvious. (version for positive numbers)
The answers here didn't help me, it kept rounding up or giving me the wrong decimal.
my solution converts your decimal to a string, extracts the characters and then returns the whole thing as a number.
function Dec2(num) {
num = String(num);
if(num.indexOf('.') !== -1) {
var numarr = num.split(".");
if (numarr.length == 1) {
return Number(num);
}
else {
return Number(numarr[0]+"."+numarr[1].charAt(0)+numarr[1].charAt(1));
}
}
else {
return Number(num);
}
}
Dec2(99); // 99
Dec2(99.9999999); // 99.99
Dec2(99.35154); // 99.35
Dec2(99.8); // 99.8
Dec2(10265.985475); // 10265.98
The following code works very good for me:
num.toString().match(/.\*\\..{0,2}|.\*/)[0];
This worked well for me. I hope it will fix your issues too.
function toFixedNumber(number) {
const spitedValues = String(number.toLocaleString()).split('.');
let decimalValue = spitedValues.length > 1 ? spitedValues[1] : '';
decimalValue = decimalValue.concat('00').substr(0,2);
return '$'+spitedValues[0] + '.' + decimalValue;
}
// 5.56789 ----> $5.56
// 0.342 ----> $0.34
// -10.3484534 ----> $-10.34
// 600 ----> $600.00
function convertNumber(){
var result = toFixedNumber(document.getElementById("valueText").value);
document.getElementById("resultText").value = result;
}
function toFixedNumber(number) {
const spitedValues = String(number.toLocaleString()).split('.');
let decimalValue = spitedValues.length > 1 ? spitedValues[1] : '';
decimalValue = decimalValue.concat('00').substr(0,2);
return '$'+spitedValues[0] + '.' + decimalValue;
}
<div>
<input type="text" id="valueText" placeholder="Input value here..">
<br>
<button onclick="convertNumber()" >Convert</button>
<br><hr>
<input type="text" id="resultText" placeholder="result" readonly="true">
</div>
An Easy way to do it is the next but is necessary ensure that the amount parameter is given as a string.
function truncate(amountAsString, decimals = 2){
var dotIndex = amountAsString.indexOf('.');
var toTruncate = dotIndex !== -1 && ( amountAsString.length > dotIndex + decimals + 1);
var approach = Math.pow(10, decimals);
var amountToTruncate = toTruncate ? amountAsString.slice(0, dotIndex + decimals +1) : amountAsString;
return toTruncate
? Math.floor(parseFloat(amountToTruncate) * approach ) / approach
: parseFloat(amountAsString);
}
console.log(truncate("7.99999")); //OUTPUT ==> 7.99
console.log(truncate("7.99999", 3)); //OUTPUT ==> 7.999
console.log(truncate("12.799999999999999")); //OUTPUT ==> 7.99
Here you are. An answer that shows yet another way to solve the problem:
// For the sake of simplicity, here is a complete function:
function truncate(numToBeTruncated, numOfDecimals) {
var theNumber = numToBeTruncated.toString();
var pointIndex = theNumber.indexOf('.');
return +(theNumber.slice(0, pointIndex > -1 ? ++numOfDecimals + pointIndex : undefined));
}
Note the use of + before the final expression. That is to convert our truncated, sliced string back to number type.
Hope it helps!
truncate without zeroes
function toTrunc(value,n){
return Math.floor(value*Math.pow(10,n))/(Math.pow(10,n));
}
or
function toTrunc(value,n){
x=(value.toString()+".0").split(".");
return parseFloat(x[0]+"."+x[1].substr(0,n));
}
test:
toTrunc(17.4532,2) //17.45
toTrunc(177.4532,1) //177.4
toTrunc(1.4532,1) //1.4
toTrunc(.4,2) //0.4
truncate with zeroes
function toTruncFixed(value,n){
return toTrunc(value,n).toFixed(n);
}
test:
toTrunc(17.4532,2) //17.45
toTrunc(177.4532,1) //177.4
toTrunc(1.4532,1) //1.4
toTrunc(.4,2) //0.40
If you exactly wanted to truncate to 2 digits of precision, you can go with a simple logic:
function myFunction(number) {
var roundedNumber = number.toFixed(2);
if (roundedNumber > number)
{
roundedNumber = roundedNumber - 0.01;
}
return roundedNumber;
}
I used (num-0.05).toFixed(1) to get the second decimal floored.
It's more reliable to get two floating points without rounding.
Reference Answer
var number = 10.5859;
var fixed2FloatPoints = parseInt(number * 100) / 100;
console.log(fixed2FloatPoints);
Thank You !
My solution in typescript (can easily be ported to JS):
/**
* Returns the price with correct precision as a string
*
* #param price The price in decimal to be formatted.
* #param decimalPlaces The number of decimal places to use
* #return string The price in Decimal formatting.
*/
type toDecimal = (price: number, decimalPlaces?: number) => string;
const toDecimalOdds: toDecimal = (
price: number,
decimalPlaces: number = 2,
): string => {
const priceString: string = price.toString();
const pointIndex: number = priceString.indexOf('.');
// Return the integer part if decimalPlaces is 0
if (decimalPlaces === 0) {
return priceString.substr(0, pointIndex);
}
// Return value with 0s appended after decimal if the price is an integer
if (pointIndex === -1) {
const padZeroString: string = '0'.repeat(decimalPlaces);
return `${priceString}.${padZeroString}`;
}
// If numbers after decimal are less than decimalPlaces, append with 0s
const padZeroLen: number = priceString.length - pointIndex - 1;
if (padZeroLen > 0 && padZeroLen < decimalPlaces) {
const padZeroString: string = '0'.repeat(padZeroLen);
return `${priceString}${padZeroString}`;
}
return priceString.substr(0, pointIndex + decimalPlaces + 1);
};
Test cases:
expect(filters.toDecimalOdds(3.14159)).toBe('3.14');
expect(filters.toDecimalOdds(3.14159, 2)).toBe('3.14');
expect(filters.toDecimalOdds(3.14159, 0)).toBe('3');
expect(filters.toDecimalOdds(3.14159, 10)).toBe('3.1415900000');
expect(filters.toDecimalOdds(8.2)).toBe('8.20');
Any improvements?
Another solution, that truncates and round:
function round (number, decimals, truncate) {
if (truncate) {
number = number.toFixed(decimals + 1);
return parseFloat(number.slice(0, -1));
}
var n = Math.pow(10.0, decimals);
return Math.round(number * n) / n;
};
function limitDecimalsWithoutRounding(val, decimals){
let parts = val.toString().split(".");
return parseFloat(parts[0] + "." + parts[1].substring(0, decimals));
}
var num = parseFloat(15.7784514);
var new_num = limitDecimalsWithoutRounding(num, 2);
Roll your own toFixed function: for positive values Math.floor works fine.
function toFixed(num, fixed) {
fixed = fixed || 0;
fixed = Math.pow(10, fixed);
return Math.floor(num * fixed) / fixed;
}
For negative values Math.floor is round of the values. So you can use Math.ceil instead.
Example,
Math.ceil(-15.778665 * 10000) / 10000 = -15.7786
Math.floor(-15.778665 * 10000) / 10000 = -15.7787 // wrong.
Gumbo's second solution, with the regular expression, does work but is slow because of the regular expression. Gumbo's first solution fails in certain situations due to imprecision in floating points numbers. See the JSFiddle for a demonstration and a benchmark. The second solution takes about 1636 nanoseconds per call on my current system, Intel Core i5-2500 CPU at 3.30 GHz.
The solution I've written involves adding a small compensation to take care of floating point imprecision. It is basically instantaneous, i.e. on the order of nanoseconds. I clocked 2 nanoseconds per call but the JavaScript timers are not very precise or granular. Here is the JS Fiddle and the code.
function toFixedWithoutRounding (value, precision)
{
var factorError = Math.pow(10, 14);
var factorTruncate = Math.pow(10, 14 - precision);
var factorDecimal = Math.pow(10, precision);
return Math.floor(Math.floor(value * factorError + 1) / factorTruncate) / factorDecimal;
}
var values = [1.1299999999, 1.13, 1.139999999, 1.14, 1.14000000001, 1.13 * 100];
for (var i = 0; i < values.length; i++)
{
var value = values[i];
console.log(value + " --> " + toFixedWithoutRounding(value, 2));
}
for (var i = 0; i < values.length; i++)
{
var value = values[i];
console.log(value + " --> " + toFixedWithoutRounding(value, 4));
}
console.log("type of result is " + typeof toFixedWithoutRounding(1.13 * 100 / 100, 2));
// Benchmark
var value = 1.13 * 100;
var startTime = new Date();
var numRun = 1000000;
var nanosecondsPerMilliseconds = 1000000;
for (var run = 0; run < numRun; run++)
toFixedWithoutRounding(value, 2);
var endTime = new Date();
var timeDiffNs = nanosecondsPerMilliseconds * (endTime - startTime);
var timePerCallNs = timeDiffNs / numRun;
console.log("Time per call (nanoseconds): " + timePerCallNs);
Building on David D's answer:
function NumberFormat(num,n) {
var num = (arguments[0] != null) ? arguments[0] : 0;
var n = (arguments[1] != null) ? arguments[1] : 2;
if(num > 0){
num = String(num);
if(num.indexOf('.') !== -1) {
var numarr = num.split(".");
if (numarr.length > 1) {
if(n > 0){
var temp = numarr[0] + ".";
for(var i = 0; i < n; i++){
if(i < numarr[1].length){
temp += numarr[1].charAt(i);
}
}
num = Number(temp);
}
}
}
}
return Number(num);
}
console.log('NumberFormat(123.85,2)',NumberFormat(123.85,2));
console.log('NumberFormat(123.851,2)',NumberFormat(123.851,2));
console.log('NumberFormat(0.85,2)',NumberFormat(0.85,2));
console.log('NumberFormat(0.851,2)',NumberFormat(0.851,2));
console.log('NumberFormat(0.85156,2)',NumberFormat(0.85156,2));
console.log('NumberFormat(0.85156,4)',NumberFormat(0.85156,4));
console.log('NumberFormat(0.85156,8)',NumberFormat(0.85156,8));
console.log('NumberFormat(".85156",2)',NumberFormat(".85156",2));
console.log('NumberFormat("0.85156",2)',NumberFormat("0.85156",2));
console.log('NumberFormat("1005.85156",2)',NumberFormat("1005.85156",2));
console.log('NumberFormat("0",2)',NumberFormat("0",2));
console.log('NumberFormat("",2)',NumberFormat("",2));
console.log('NumberFormat(85156,8)',NumberFormat(85156,8));
console.log('NumberFormat("85156",2)',NumberFormat("85156",2));
console.log('NumberFormat("85156.",2)',NumberFormat("85156.",2));
// NumberFormat(123.85,2) 123.85
// NumberFormat(123.851,2) 123.85
// NumberFormat(0.85,2) 0.85
// NumberFormat(0.851,2) 0.85
// NumberFormat(0.85156,2) 0.85
// NumberFormat(0.85156,4) 0.8515
// NumberFormat(0.85156,8) 0.85156
// NumberFormat(".85156",2) 0.85
// NumberFormat("0.85156",2) 0.85
// NumberFormat("1005.85156",2) 1005.85
// NumberFormat("0",2) 0
// NumberFormat("",2) 0
// NumberFormat(85156,8) 85156
// NumberFormat("85156",2) 85156
// NumberFormat("85156.",2) 85156
Already there are some suitable answer with regular expression and arithmetic calculation, you can also try this
function myFunction() {
var str = 12.234556;
str = str.toString().split('.');
var res = str[1].slice(0, 2);
document.getElementById("demo").innerHTML = str[0]+'.'+res;
}
// output: 12.23
Here is what is did it with string
export function withoutRange(number) {
const str = String(number);
const dotPosition = str.indexOf('.');
if (dotPosition > 0) {
const length = str.substring().length;
const end = length > 3 ? 3 : length;
return str.substring(0, dotPosition + end);
}
return str;
}
I want to convert a number to its corresponding alphabet letter. For example:
1 = A
2 = B
3 = C
Can this be done in javascript without manually creating the array?
In php there is a range() function that creates the array automatically. Anything similar in javascript?
Yes, with Number#toString(36) and an adjustment.
var value = 10;
document.write((value + 9).toString(36).toUpperCase());
You can simply do this without arrays using String.fromCharCode(code) function as letters have consecutive codes. For example: String.fromCharCode(1+64) gives you 'A', String.fromCharCode(2+64) gives you 'B', and so on.
Snippet below turns the characters in the alphabet to work like numerical system
1 = A
2 = B
...
26 = Z
27 = AA
28 = AB
...
78 = BZ
79 = CA
80 = CB
var alphabet = "ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ"
var result = ""
function printToLetter(number){
var charIndex = number % alphabet.length
var quotient = number/alphabet.length
if(charIndex-1 == -1){
charIndex = alphabet.length
quotient--;
}
result = alphabet.charAt(charIndex-1) + result;
if(quotient>=1){
printToLetter(parseInt(quotient));
}else{
console.log(result)
result = ""
}
}
I created this function to save characters when printing but had to scrap it since I don't want to handle improper words that may eventually form
Just increment letterIndex from 0 (A) to 25 (Z)
const letterIndex = 0
const letter = String.fromCharCode(letterIndex + 'A'.charCodeAt(0))
console.log(letter)
UPDATE (5/2/22): After I needed this code in a second project, I decided to enhance the below answer and turn it into a ready to use NPM library called alphanumeric-encoder. If you don't want to build your own solution to this problem, go check out the library!
I built the following solution as an enhancement to #esantos's answer.
The first function defines a valid lookup encoding dictionary. Here, I used all 26 letters of the English alphabet, but the following will work just as well: "ABCDEFG", "ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ0123456789", "GFEDCBA". Using one of these dictionaries will result in converting your base 10 number into a base dictionary.length number with appropriately encoded digits. The only restriction is that each of the characters in the dictionary must be unique.
function getDictionary() {
return validateDictionary("ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ")
function validateDictionary(dictionary) {
for (let i = 0; i < dictionary.length; i++) {
if(dictionary.indexOf(dictionary[i]) !== dictionary.lastIndexOf(dictionary[i])) {
console.log('Error: The dictionary in use has at least one repeating symbol:', dictionary[i])
return undefined
}
}
return dictionary
}
}
We can now use this dictionary to encode our base 10 number.
function numberToEncodedLetter(number) {
//Takes any number and converts it into a base (dictionary length) letter combo. 0 corresponds to an empty string.
//It converts any numerical entry into a positive integer.
if (isNaN(number)) {return undefined}
number = Math.abs(Math.floor(number))
const dictionary = getDictionary()
let index = number % dictionary.length
let quotient = number / dictionary.length
let result
if (number <= dictionary.length) {return numToLetter(number)} //Number is within single digit bounds of our encoding letter alphabet
if (quotient >= 1) {
//This number was bigger than our dictionary, recursively perform this function until we're done
if (index === 0) {quotient--} //Accounts for the edge case of the last letter in the dictionary string
result = numberToEncodedLetter(quotient)
}
if (index === 0) {index = dictionary.length} //Accounts for the edge case of the final letter; avoids getting an empty string
return result + numToLetter(index)
function numToLetter(number) {
//Takes a letter between 0 and max letter length and returns the corresponding letter
if (number > dictionary.length || number < 0) {return undefined}
if (number === 0) {
return ''
} else {
return dictionary.slice(number - 1, number)
}
}
}
An encoded set of letters is great, but it's kind of useless to computers if I can't convert it back to a base 10 number.
function encodedLetterToNumber(encoded) {
//Takes any number encoded with the provided encode dictionary
const dictionary = getDictionary()
let result = 0
let index = 0
for (let i = 1; i <= encoded.length; i++) {
index = dictionary.search(encoded.slice(i - 1, i)) + 1
if (index === 0) {return undefined} //Attempted to find a letter that wasn't encoded in the dictionary
result = result + index * Math.pow(dictionary.length, (encoded.length - i))
}
return result
}
Now to test it out:
console.log(numberToEncodedLetter(4)) //D
console.log(numberToEncodedLetter(52)) //AZ
console.log(encodedLetterToNumber("BZ")) //78
console.log(encodedLetterToNumber("AAC")) //705
UPDATE
You can also use this function to take that short name format you have and return it to an index-based format.
function shortNameToIndex(shortName) {
//Takes the short name (e.g. F6, AA47) and converts to base indecies ({6, 6}, {27, 47})
if (shortName.length < 2) {return undefined} //Must be at least one letter and one number
if (!isNaN(shortName.slice(0, 1))) {return undefined} //If first character isn't a letter, it's incorrectly formatted
let letterPart = ''
let numberPart= ''
let splitComplete = false
let index = 1
do {
const character = shortName.slice(index - 1, index)
if (!isNaN(character)) {splitComplete = true}
if (splitComplete && isNaN(character)) {
//More letters existed after the numbers. Invalid formatting.
return undefined
} else if (splitComplete && !isNaN(character)) {
//Number part
numberPart = numberPart.concat(character)
} else {
//Letter part
letterPart = letterPart.concat(character)
}
index++
} while (index <= shortName.length)
numberPart = parseInt(numberPart)
letterPart = encodedLetterToNumber(letterPart)
return {xIndex: numberPart, yIndex: letterPart}
}
this can help you
static readonly string[] Columns_Lettre = new[] { "A", "B", "C"};
public static string IndexToColumn(int index)
{
if (index <= 0)
throw new IndexOutOfRangeException("index must be a positive number");
if (index < 4)
return Columns_Lettre[index - 1];
else
return index.ToString();
}
How can I generate some unique random numbers between 1 and 100 using JavaScript?
For example: To generate 8 unique random numbers and store them to an array, you can simply do this:
var arr = [];
while(arr.length < 8){
var r = Math.floor(Math.random() * 100) + 1;
if(arr.indexOf(r) === -1) arr.push(r);
}
console.log(arr);
Populate an array with the numbers 1 through 100.
Shuffle it.
Take the first 8 elements of the resulting array.
Modern JS Solution using Set (and average case O(n))
const nums = new Set();
while(nums.size !== 8) {
nums.add(Math.floor(Math.random() * 100) + 1);
}
console.log([...nums]);
Another approach is to generate an 100 items array with ascending numbers and sort it randomly. This leads actually to a really short and (in my opinion) simple snippet.
const numbers = Array(100).fill().map((_, index) => index + 1);
numbers.sort(() => Math.random() - 0.5);
console.log(numbers.slice(0, 8));
Generate permutation of 100 numbers and then choose serially.
Use Knuth Shuffle(aka the Fisher-Yates shuffle) Algorithm.
JavaScript:
function fisherYates ( myArray,stop_count ) {
var i = myArray.length;
if ( i == 0 ) return false;
int c = 0;
while ( --i ) {
var j = Math.floor( Math.random() * ( i + 1 ) );
var tempi = myArray[i];
var tempj = myArray[j];
myArray[i] = tempj;
myArray[j] = tempi;
// Edited thanks to Frerich Raabe
c++;
if(c == stop_count)return;
}
}
CODE COPIED FROM LINK.
EDIT:
Improved code:
function fisherYates(myArray,nb_picks)
{
for (i = myArray.length-1; i > 1 ; i--)
{
var r = Math.floor(Math.random()*i);
var t = myArray[i];
myArray[i] = myArray[r];
myArray[r] = t;
}
return myArray.slice(0,nb_picks);
}
Potential problem:
Suppose we have array of 100 numbers {e.g. [1,2,3...100]} and we stop swapping after 8 swaps;
then most of the times array will look like {1,2,3,76,5,6,7,8,...numbers here will be shuffled ...10}.
Because every number will be swapped with probability 1/100 so
prob. of swapping first 8 numbers is 8/100 whereas prob. of swapping other 92 is 92/100.
But if we run algorithm for full array then we are sure (almost)every entry is swapped.
Otherwise we face a question : which 8 numbers to choose?
The above techniques are good if you want to avoid a library, but depending if you would be alright with a library, I would suggest checking out Chance for generating random stuff in JavaScript.
Specifically to solve your question, using Chance it's as easy as:
// One line!
var uniques = chance.unique(chance.natural, 8, {min: 1, max: 100});
// Print it out to the document for this snippet so we can see it in action
document.write(JSON.stringify(uniques));
<script src="http://chancejs.com/chance.min.js"></script>
Disclaimer, as the author of Chance, I am a bit biased ;)
To avoid any long and unreliable shuffles, I'd do the following...
Generate an array that contains the number between 1 and 100, in order.
Generate a random number between 1 and 100
Look up the number at this index in the array and store in your results
Remove the elemnt from the array, making it one shorter
Repeat from step 2, but use 99 as the upper limit of the random number
Repeat from step 2, but use 98 as the upper limit of the random number
Repeat from step 2, but use 97 as the upper limit of the random number
Repeat from step 2, but use 96 as the upper limit of the random number
Repeat from step 2, but use 95 as the upper limit of the random number
Repeat from step 2, but use 94 as the upper limit of the random number
Repeat from step 2, but use 93 as the upper limit of the random number
Voila - no repeated numbers.
I may post some actual code later, if anybody is interested.
Edit: It's probably the competitive streak in me but, having seen the post by #Alsciende, I couldn't resist posting the code that I promised.
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2 Final//EN">
<html>
<head>
<title>8 unique random number between 1 and 100</title>
<script type="text/javascript" language="Javascript">
function pick(n, min, max){
var values = [], i = max;
while(i >= min) values.push(i--);
var results = [];
var maxIndex = max;
for(i=1; i <= n; i++){
maxIndex--;
var index = Math.floor(maxIndex * Math.random());
results.push(values[index]);
values[index] = values[maxIndex];
}
return results;
}
function go(){
var running = true;
do{
if(!confirm(pick(8, 1, 100).sort(function(a,b){return a - b;}))){
running = false;
}
}while(running)
}
</script>
</head>
<body>
<h1>8 unique random number between 1 and 100</h1>
<p><button onclick="go()">Click me</button> to start generating numbers.</p>
<p>When the numbers appear, click OK to generate another set, or Cancel to stop.</p>
</body>
I would do this:
function randomInt(min, max) {
return Math.round(min + Math.random()*(max-min));
}
var index = {}, numbers = [];
for (var i=0; i<8; ++i) {
var number;
do {
number = randomInt(1, 100);
} while (index.hasOwnProperty("_"+number));
index["_"+number] = true;
numbers.push(number);
}
delete index;
This is a very generic function I have written to generate random unique/non-unique integers for an array. Assume the last parameter to be true in this scenario for this answer.
/* Creates an array of random integers between the range specified
len = length of the array you want to generate
min = min value you require
max = max value you require
unique = whether you want unique or not (assume 'true' for this answer)
*/
function _arrayRandom(len, min, max, unique) {
var len = (len) ? len : 10,
min = (min !== undefined) ? min : 1,
max = (max !== undefined) ? max : 100,
unique = (unique) ? unique : false,
toReturn = [], tempObj = {}, i = 0;
if(unique === true) {
for(; i < len; i++) {
var randomInt = Math.floor(Math.random() * ((max - min) + min));
if(tempObj['key_'+ randomInt] === undefined) {
tempObj['key_'+ randomInt] = randomInt;
toReturn.push(randomInt);
} else {
i--;
}
}
} else {
for(; i < len; i++) {
toReturn.push(Math.floor(Math.random() * ((max - min) + min)));
}
}
return toReturn;
}
Here the 'tempObj' is a very useful obj since every random number generated will directly check in this tempObj if that key already exists, if not, then we reduce the i by one since we need 1 extra run since the current random number already exists.
In your case, run the following
_arrayRandom(8, 1, 100, true);
That's all.
Shuffling the numbers from 1 to 100 is the right basic strategy, but if you need only 8 shuffled numbers, there's no need to shuffle all 100 numbers.
I don't know Javascript very well, but I believe it's easy to create an array of 100 nulls quickly. Then, for 8 rounds, you swap the n'th element of the array (n starting at 0) with a randomly selected element from n+1 through 99. Of course, any elements not populated yet mean that the element would really have been the original index plus 1, so that's trivial to factor in. When you're done with the 8 rounds, the first 8 elements of your array will have your 8 shuffled numbers.
var arr = []
while(arr.length < 8){
var randomnumber=Math.ceil(Math.random()*100)
if(arr.indexOf(randomnumber) === -1){arr.push(randomnumber)}
}
document.write(arr);
shorter than other answers I've seen
Implementing this as a generator makes it pretty nice to work with. Note, this implementation differs from ones that require the entire input array to be shuffled first.
This sample function works lazily, giving you 1 random item per iteration up to N items you ask for. This is nice because if you just want 3 items from a list of 1000, you don't have to touch all 1000 items first.
// sample :: Integer -> [a] -> [a]
const sample = n => function* (xs) {
let ys = xs.slice(0);
let len = xs.length;
while (n > 0 && len > 0) {
let i = (Math.random() * len) >> 0;
yield ys.splice(i,1)[0];
n--; len--;
}
}
// example inputs
let items = ['a', 'b', 'c', 'd', 'e', 'f', 'g'];
let numbers = [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9];
// get 3 random items
for (let i of sample(3) (items))
console.log(i); // f g c
// partial application
const lotto = sample(3);
for (let i of lotto(numbers))
console.log(i); // 3 8 7
// shuffle an array
const shuffle = xs => Array.from(sample (Infinity) (xs))
console.log(shuffle(items)) // [b c g f d e a]
I chose to implement sample in a way that does not mutate the input array, but you could easily argue that a mutating implementation is favourable.
For example, the shuffle function might wish to mutate the original input array. Or you might wish to sample from the same input at various times, updating the input each time.
// sample :: Integer -> [a] -> [a]
const sample = n => function* (xs) {
let len = xs.length;
while (n > 0 && len > 0) {
let i = (Math.random() * len) >> 0;
yield xs.splice(i,1)[0];
n--; len--;
}
}
// deal :: [Card] -> [Card]
const deal = xs => Array.from(sample (2) (xs));
// setup a deck of cards (13 in this case)
// cards :: [Card]
let cards = 'A234567890JQK'.split('');
// deal 6 players 2 cards each
// players :: [[Card]]
let players = Array.from(Array(6), $=> deal(cards))
console.log(players);
// [K, J], [6, 0], [2, 8], [Q, 7], [5, 4], [9, A]
// `cards` has been mutated. only 1 card remains in the deck
console.log(cards);
// [3]
sample is no longer a pure function because of the array input mutation, but in certain circumstances (demonstrated above) it might make more sense.
Another reason I chose a generator instead of a function that just returns an array is because you may want to continue sampling until some specific condition.
Perhaps I want the first prime number from a list of 1,000,000 random numbers.
"How many should I sample?" – you don't have to specify
"Do I have to find all the primes first and then select a random prime?" – Nope.
Because we're working with a generator, this task is trivial
const randomPrimeNumber = listOfNumbers => {
for (let x of sample(Infinity) (listOfNumbers)) {
if (isPrime(x))
return x;
}
return NaN;
}
This will continuously sample 1 random number at a time, x, check if it's prime, then return x if it is. If the list of numbers is exhausted before a prime is found, NaN is returned.
Note:
This answer was originally shared on another question that was closed as a duplicate of this one. Because it's very different from the other solutions provided here, I've decided to share it here as well
var numbers = [];
for (let i = 0; i < 8; i++) {
let a = true,
n;
while(a) {
n = Math.floor(Math.random() * 100) + 1;
a = numbers.includes(n);
}
numbers.push(n);
}
console.log(numbers);
Same permutation algorithm as The Machine Charmer, but with a prototyped implementation. Better suited to large number of picks. Uses js 1.7 destructuring assignment if available.
// swaps elements at index i and j in array this
// swapping is easy on js 1.7 (feature detection)
Array.prototype.swap = (function () {
var i=0, j=1;
try { [i,j]=[j,i]; }
catch (e) {}
if(i) {
return function(i,j) {
[this[i],this[j]] = [this[j],this[i]];
return this;
}
} else {
return function(i,j) {
var temp = this[i];
this[i] = this[j];
this[j] = temp;
return this;
}
}
})();
// shuffles array this
Array.prototype.shuffle = function() {
for(var i=this.length; i>1; i--) {
this.swap(i-1, Math.floor(i*Math.random()));
}
return this;
}
// returns n unique random numbers between min and max
function pick(n, min, max) {
var a = [], i = max;
while(i >= min) a.push(i--);
return a.shuffle().slice(0,n);
}
pick(8,1,100);
Edit:
An other proposition, better suited to small number of picks, based on belugabob's answer. To guarantee uniqueness, we remove the picked numbers from the array.
// removes n random elements from array this
// and returns them
Array.prototype.pick = function(n) {
if(!n || !this.length) return [];
var i = Math.floor(this.length*Math.random());
return this.splice(i,1).concat(this.pick(n-1));
}
// returns n unique random numbers between min and max
function pick(n, min, max) {
var a = [], i = max;
while(i >= min) a.push(i--);
return a.pick(n);
}
pick(8,1,100);
for arrays with holes like this [,2,,4,,6,7,,]
because my problem was to fill these holes. So I modified it as per my need :)
the following modified solution worked for me :)
var arr = [,2,,4,,6,7,,]; //example
while(arr.length < 9){
var randomnumber=Math.floor(Math.random()*9+1);
var found=false;
for(var i=0;i<arr.length;i++){
if(arr[i]==randomnumber){found=true;break;}
}
if(!found)
for(k=0;k<9;k++)
{if(!arr[k]) //if it's empty !!MODIFICATION
{arr[k]=randomnumber; break;}}
}
alert(arr); //outputs on the screen
The best earlier answer is the answer by sje397. You will get as good random numbers as you can get, as quick as possible.
My solution is very similar to his solution. However, sometimes you want the random numbers in random order, and that is why I decided to post an answer. In addition, I provide a general function.
function selectKOutOfN(k, n) {
if (k>n) throw "k>n";
var selection = [];
var sorted = [];
for (var i = 0; i < k; i++) {
var rand = Math.floor(Math.random()*(n - i));
for (var j = 0; j < i; j++) {
if (sorted[j]<=rand)
rand++;
else
break;
}
selection.push(rand);
sorted.splice(j, 0, rand);
}
return selection;
}
alert(selectKOutOfN(8, 100));
Here is my ES6 version I cobbled together. I'm sure it can be a little more consolidated.
function randomArray(i, min, max) {
min = Math.ceil(min);
max = Math.floor(max);
let arr = Array.from({length: i}, () => Math.floor(Math.random()* (max - min)) + min);
return arr.sort();
}
let uniqueItems = [...new Set(randomArray(8, 0, 100))]
console.log(uniqueItems);
How about using object properties as a hash table? This way your best scenario is to only randomize 8 times. It would only be effective if you want a small part of the range of numbers. It's also much less memory intensive than Fisher-Yates because you don't have to allocate space for an array.
var ht={}, i=rands=8;
while ( i>0 || keys(ht).length<rands) ht[Math.ceil(Math.random()*100)]=i--;
alert(keys(ht));
I then found out that Object.keys(obj) is an ECMAScript 5 feature so the above is pretty much useless on the internets right now. Fear not, because I made it ECMAScript 3 compatible by adding a keys function like this.
if (typeof keys == "undefined")
{
var keys = function(obj)
{
props=[];
for (k in ht) if (ht.hasOwnProperty(k)) props.push(k);
return props;
}
}
var bombout=0;
var checkArr=[];
var arr=[];
while(arr.length < 8 && bombout<100){
bombout++;
var randomNumber=Math.ceil(Math.random()*100);
if(typeof checkArr[randomNumber] == "undefined"){
checkArr[randomNumber]=1;
arr.push(randomNumber);
}
}
// untested - hence bombout
if you need more unique you must generate a array(1..100).
var arr=[];
function generateRandoms(){
for(var i=1;i<=100;i++) arr.push(i);
}
function extractUniqueRandom()
{
if (arr.length==0) generateRandoms();
var randIndex=Math.floor(arr.length*Math.random());
var result=arr[randIndex];
arr.splice(randIndex,1);
return result;
}
function extractUniqueRandomArray(n)
{
var resultArr=[];
for(var i=0;i<n;i++) resultArr.push(extractUniqueRandom());
return resultArr;
}
above code is faster:
extractUniqueRandomArray(50)=>
[2, 79, 38, 59, 63, 42, 52, 22, 78, 50, 39, 77, 1, 88, 40, 23, 48, 84, 91, 49, 4, 54, 93, 36, 100, 82, 62, 41, 89, 12, 24, 31, 86, 92, 64, 75, 70, 61, 67, 98, 76, 80, 56, 90, 83, 44, 43, 47, 7, 53]
Adding another better version of same code (accepted answer) with JavaScript 1.6 indexOf function. Do not need to loop thru whole array every time you are checking the duplicate.
var arr = []
while(arr.length < 8){
var randomnumber=Math.ceil(Math.random()*100)
var found=false;
if(arr.indexOf(randomnumber) > -1){found=true;}
if(!found)arr[arr.length]=randomnumber;
}
Older version of Javascript can still use the version at top
PS: Tried suggesting an update to the wiki but it was rejected. I still think it may be useful for others.
This is my personal solution :
<script>
var i, k;
var numbers = new Array();
k = Math.floor((Math.random()*8));
numbers[0]=k;
for (var j=1;j<8;j++){
k = Math.floor((Math.random()*8));
i=0;
while (i < numbers.length){
if (numbers[i] == k){
k = Math.floor((Math.random()*8));
i=0;
}else {i++;}
}
numbers[j]=k;
}
for (var j=0;j<8;j++){
alert (numbers[j]);
}
</script>
It randomly generates 8 unique array values (between 0 and 7), then displays them using an alert box.
function getUniqueRandomNos() {
var indexedArrayOfRandomNo = [];
for (var i = 0; i < 100; i++) {
var randNo = Math.random();
indexedArrayOfRandomNo.push([i, randNo]);
}
indexedArrayOfRandomNo.sort(function (arr1, arr2) {
return arr1[1] - arr2[1]
});
var uniqueRandNoArray = [];
for (i = 0; i < 8; i++) {
uniqueRandNoArray.push(indexedArrayOfRandomNo[i][0]);
}
return uniqueRandNoArray;
}
I think this method is different from methods given in most of the answers, so I thought I might add an answer here (though the question was asked 4 years ago).
We generate 100 random numbers, and tag each of them with numbers from 1 to 100. Then we sort these tagged random numbers, and the tags get shuffled randomly. Alternatively, as needed in this question, one could do away with just finding top 8 of the tagged random numbers. Finding top 8 items is cheaper than sorting the whole array.
One must note here, that the sorting algorithm influences this algorithm. If the sorting algorithm used is stable, there is slight bias in favor of smaller numbers. Ideally, we would want the sorting algorithm to be unstable and not even biased towards stability (or instability) to produce an answer with perfectly uniform probability distribution.
This can handle generating upto 20 digit UNIQUE random number
JS
var generatedNumbers = [];
function generateRandomNumber(precision) { // input --> number precision in integer
if (precision <= 20) {
var randomNum = Math.round(Math.random().toFixed(precision) * Math.pow(10, precision));
if (generatedNumbers.indexOf(randomNum) > -1) {
if (generatedNumbers.length == Math.pow(10, precision))
return "Generated all values with this precision";
return generateRandomNumber(precision);
} else {
generatedNumbers.push(randomNum);
return randomNum;
}
} else
return "Number Precision shoould not exceed 20";
}
generateRandomNumber(1);
jsFiddle
This solution uses the hash which is much more performant O(1) than checking if the resides in the array. It has extra safe checks too. Hope it helps.
function uniqueArray(minRange, maxRange, arrayLength) {
var arrayLength = (arrayLength) ? arrayLength : 10
var minRange = (minRange !== undefined) ? minRange : 1
var maxRange = (maxRange !== undefined) ? maxRange : 100
var numberOfItemsInArray = 0
var hash = {}
var array = []
if ( arrayLength > (maxRange - minRange) ) throw new Error('Cannot generate unique array: Array length too high')
while(numberOfItemsInArray < arrayLength){
// var randomNumber = Math.floor(Math.random() * (maxRange - minRange + 1) + minRange)
// following line used for performance benefits
var randomNumber = (Math.random() * (maxRange - minRange + 1) + minRange) << 0
if (!hash[randomNumber]) {
hash[randomNumber] = true
array.push(randomNumber)
numberOfItemsInArray++
}
}
return array
}
document.write(uniqueArray(1, 100, 8))
You can also do it with a one liner like this:
[...((add, set) => add(set, add))((set, add) => set.size < 8 ? add(set.add(Math.floor(Math.random()*100) + 1), add) : set, new Set())]
getRandom (min, max) {
return Math.floor(Math.random() * (max - min)) + min
}
getNRandom (min, max, n) {
const numbers = []
if (min > max) {
return new Error('Max is gt min')
}
if (min === max) {
return [min]
}
if ((max - min) >= n) {
while (numbers.length < n) {
let rand = this.getRandom(min, max + 1)
if (numbers.indexOf(rand) === -1) {
numbers.push(rand)
}
}
}
if ((max - min) < n) {
for (let i = min; i <= max; i++) {
numbers.push(i)
}
}
return numbers
}
Using a Set is your fastest option. Here is a generic function for getting a unique random that uses a callback generator. Now it's fast and reusable.
// Get a unique 'anything'
let unique = new Set()
function getUnique(generator) {
let number = generator()
while (!unique.add(number)) {
number = generator()
}
return number;
}
// The generator. Return anything, not just numbers.
const between_1_100 = () => 1 + Math.floor(Math.random() * 100)
// Test it
for (var i = 0; i < 8; i++) {
const aNumber = getUnique(between_1_100)
}
// Dump the 'stored numbers'
console.log(Array.from(unique))
This is a implementation of Fisher Yates/Durstenfeld Shuffle, but without actual creation of a array thus reducing space complexity or memory needed, when the pick size is small compared to the number of elements available.
To pick 8 numbers from 100, it is not necessary to create a array of 100 elements.
Assuming a array is created,
From the end of array(100), get random number(rnd) from 1 to 100
Swap 100 and the random number rnd
Repeat step 1 with array(99)
If a array is not created, A hashMap may be used to remember the actual swapped positions. When the second random number generated is equal to the one of the previously generated numbers, the map provides the current value in that position rather than the actual value.
const getRandom_ = (start, end) => {
return Math.floor(Math.random() * (end - start + 1)) + start;
};
const getRealValue_ = (map, rnd) => {
if (map.has(rnd)) {
return getRealValue_(map, map.get(rnd));
} else {
return rnd;
}
};
const getRandomNumbers = (n, start, end) => {
const out = new Map();
while (n--) {
const rnd = getRandom_(start, end--);
out.set(getRealValue_(out, rnd), end + 1);
}
return [...out.keys()];
};
console.info(getRandomNumbers(8, 1, 100));
console.info(getRandomNumbers(8, 1, Math.pow(10, 12)));
console.info(getRandomNumbers(800000, 1, Math.pow(10, 15)));
Here is an example of random 5 numbers taken from a range of 0 to 100 (both 0 and 100 included) with no duplication.
let finals = [];
const count = 5; // Considering 5 numbers
const max = 100;
for(let i = 0; i < max; i++){
const rand = Math.round(Math.random() * max);
!finals.includes(rand) && finals.push(rand)
}
finals = finals.slice(0, count)
How can I generate some unique random numbers between 1 and 100 using JavaScript?
For example: To generate 8 unique random numbers and store them to an array, you can simply do this:
var arr = [];
while(arr.length < 8){
var r = Math.floor(Math.random() * 100) + 1;
if(arr.indexOf(r) === -1) arr.push(r);
}
console.log(arr);
Populate an array with the numbers 1 through 100.
Shuffle it.
Take the first 8 elements of the resulting array.
Modern JS Solution using Set (and average case O(n))
const nums = new Set();
while(nums.size !== 8) {
nums.add(Math.floor(Math.random() * 100) + 1);
}
console.log([...nums]);
Another approach is to generate an 100 items array with ascending numbers and sort it randomly. This leads actually to a really short and (in my opinion) simple snippet.
const numbers = Array(100).fill().map((_, index) => index + 1);
numbers.sort(() => Math.random() - 0.5);
console.log(numbers.slice(0, 8));
Generate permutation of 100 numbers and then choose serially.
Use Knuth Shuffle(aka the Fisher-Yates shuffle) Algorithm.
JavaScript:
function fisherYates ( myArray,stop_count ) {
var i = myArray.length;
if ( i == 0 ) return false;
int c = 0;
while ( --i ) {
var j = Math.floor( Math.random() * ( i + 1 ) );
var tempi = myArray[i];
var tempj = myArray[j];
myArray[i] = tempj;
myArray[j] = tempi;
// Edited thanks to Frerich Raabe
c++;
if(c == stop_count)return;
}
}
CODE COPIED FROM LINK.
EDIT:
Improved code:
function fisherYates(myArray,nb_picks)
{
for (i = myArray.length-1; i > 1 ; i--)
{
var r = Math.floor(Math.random()*i);
var t = myArray[i];
myArray[i] = myArray[r];
myArray[r] = t;
}
return myArray.slice(0,nb_picks);
}
Potential problem:
Suppose we have array of 100 numbers {e.g. [1,2,3...100]} and we stop swapping after 8 swaps;
then most of the times array will look like {1,2,3,76,5,6,7,8,...numbers here will be shuffled ...10}.
Because every number will be swapped with probability 1/100 so
prob. of swapping first 8 numbers is 8/100 whereas prob. of swapping other 92 is 92/100.
But if we run algorithm for full array then we are sure (almost)every entry is swapped.
Otherwise we face a question : which 8 numbers to choose?
The above techniques are good if you want to avoid a library, but depending if you would be alright with a library, I would suggest checking out Chance for generating random stuff in JavaScript.
Specifically to solve your question, using Chance it's as easy as:
// One line!
var uniques = chance.unique(chance.natural, 8, {min: 1, max: 100});
// Print it out to the document for this snippet so we can see it in action
document.write(JSON.stringify(uniques));
<script src="http://chancejs.com/chance.min.js"></script>
Disclaimer, as the author of Chance, I am a bit biased ;)
To avoid any long and unreliable shuffles, I'd do the following...
Generate an array that contains the number between 1 and 100, in order.
Generate a random number between 1 and 100
Look up the number at this index in the array and store in your results
Remove the elemnt from the array, making it one shorter
Repeat from step 2, but use 99 as the upper limit of the random number
Repeat from step 2, but use 98 as the upper limit of the random number
Repeat from step 2, but use 97 as the upper limit of the random number
Repeat from step 2, but use 96 as the upper limit of the random number
Repeat from step 2, but use 95 as the upper limit of the random number
Repeat from step 2, but use 94 as the upper limit of the random number
Repeat from step 2, but use 93 as the upper limit of the random number
Voila - no repeated numbers.
I may post some actual code later, if anybody is interested.
Edit: It's probably the competitive streak in me but, having seen the post by #Alsciende, I couldn't resist posting the code that I promised.
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2 Final//EN">
<html>
<head>
<title>8 unique random number between 1 and 100</title>
<script type="text/javascript" language="Javascript">
function pick(n, min, max){
var values = [], i = max;
while(i >= min) values.push(i--);
var results = [];
var maxIndex = max;
for(i=1; i <= n; i++){
maxIndex--;
var index = Math.floor(maxIndex * Math.random());
results.push(values[index]);
values[index] = values[maxIndex];
}
return results;
}
function go(){
var running = true;
do{
if(!confirm(pick(8, 1, 100).sort(function(a,b){return a - b;}))){
running = false;
}
}while(running)
}
</script>
</head>
<body>
<h1>8 unique random number between 1 and 100</h1>
<p><button onclick="go()">Click me</button> to start generating numbers.</p>
<p>When the numbers appear, click OK to generate another set, or Cancel to stop.</p>
</body>
I would do this:
function randomInt(min, max) {
return Math.round(min + Math.random()*(max-min));
}
var index = {}, numbers = [];
for (var i=0; i<8; ++i) {
var number;
do {
number = randomInt(1, 100);
} while (index.hasOwnProperty("_"+number));
index["_"+number] = true;
numbers.push(number);
}
delete index;
This is a very generic function I have written to generate random unique/non-unique integers for an array. Assume the last parameter to be true in this scenario for this answer.
/* Creates an array of random integers between the range specified
len = length of the array you want to generate
min = min value you require
max = max value you require
unique = whether you want unique or not (assume 'true' for this answer)
*/
function _arrayRandom(len, min, max, unique) {
var len = (len) ? len : 10,
min = (min !== undefined) ? min : 1,
max = (max !== undefined) ? max : 100,
unique = (unique) ? unique : false,
toReturn = [], tempObj = {}, i = 0;
if(unique === true) {
for(; i < len; i++) {
var randomInt = Math.floor(Math.random() * ((max - min) + min));
if(tempObj['key_'+ randomInt] === undefined) {
tempObj['key_'+ randomInt] = randomInt;
toReturn.push(randomInt);
} else {
i--;
}
}
} else {
for(; i < len; i++) {
toReturn.push(Math.floor(Math.random() * ((max - min) + min)));
}
}
return toReturn;
}
Here the 'tempObj' is a very useful obj since every random number generated will directly check in this tempObj if that key already exists, if not, then we reduce the i by one since we need 1 extra run since the current random number already exists.
In your case, run the following
_arrayRandom(8, 1, 100, true);
That's all.
Shuffling the numbers from 1 to 100 is the right basic strategy, but if you need only 8 shuffled numbers, there's no need to shuffle all 100 numbers.
I don't know Javascript very well, but I believe it's easy to create an array of 100 nulls quickly. Then, for 8 rounds, you swap the n'th element of the array (n starting at 0) with a randomly selected element from n+1 through 99. Of course, any elements not populated yet mean that the element would really have been the original index plus 1, so that's trivial to factor in. When you're done with the 8 rounds, the first 8 elements of your array will have your 8 shuffled numbers.
var arr = []
while(arr.length < 8){
var randomnumber=Math.ceil(Math.random()*100)
if(arr.indexOf(randomnumber) === -1){arr.push(randomnumber)}
}
document.write(arr);
shorter than other answers I've seen
Implementing this as a generator makes it pretty nice to work with. Note, this implementation differs from ones that require the entire input array to be shuffled first.
This sample function works lazily, giving you 1 random item per iteration up to N items you ask for. This is nice because if you just want 3 items from a list of 1000, you don't have to touch all 1000 items first.
// sample :: Integer -> [a] -> [a]
const sample = n => function* (xs) {
let ys = xs.slice(0);
let len = xs.length;
while (n > 0 && len > 0) {
let i = (Math.random() * len) >> 0;
yield ys.splice(i,1)[0];
n--; len--;
}
}
// example inputs
let items = ['a', 'b', 'c', 'd', 'e', 'f', 'g'];
let numbers = [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9];
// get 3 random items
for (let i of sample(3) (items))
console.log(i); // f g c
// partial application
const lotto = sample(3);
for (let i of lotto(numbers))
console.log(i); // 3 8 7
// shuffle an array
const shuffle = xs => Array.from(sample (Infinity) (xs))
console.log(shuffle(items)) // [b c g f d e a]
I chose to implement sample in a way that does not mutate the input array, but you could easily argue that a mutating implementation is favourable.
For example, the shuffle function might wish to mutate the original input array. Or you might wish to sample from the same input at various times, updating the input each time.
// sample :: Integer -> [a] -> [a]
const sample = n => function* (xs) {
let len = xs.length;
while (n > 0 && len > 0) {
let i = (Math.random() * len) >> 0;
yield xs.splice(i,1)[0];
n--; len--;
}
}
// deal :: [Card] -> [Card]
const deal = xs => Array.from(sample (2) (xs));
// setup a deck of cards (13 in this case)
// cards :: [Card]
let cards = 'A234567890JQK'.split('');
// deal 6 players 2 cards each
// players :: [[Card]]
let players = Array.from(Array(6), $=> deal(cards))
console.log(players);
// [K, J], [6, 0], [2, 8], [Q, 7], [5, 4], [9, A]
// `cards` has been mutated. only 1 card remains in the deck
console.log(cards);
// [3]
sample is no longer a pure function because of the array input mutation, but in certain circumstances (demonstrated above) it might make more sense.
Another reason I chose a generator instead of a function that just returns an array is because you may want to continue sampling until some specific condition.
Perhaps I want the first prime number from a list of 1,000,000 random numbers.
"How many should I sample?" – you don't have to specify
"Do I have to find all the primes first and then select a random prime?" – Nope.
Because we're working with a generator, this task is trivial
const randomPrimeNumber = listOfNumbers => {
for (let x of sample(Infinity) (listOfNumbers)) {
if (isPrime(x))
return x;
}
return NaN;
}
This will continuously sample 1 random number at a time, x, check if it's prime, then return x if it is. If the list of numbers is exhausted before a prime is found, NaN is returned.
Note:
This answer was originally shared on another question that was closed as a duplicate of this one. Because it's very different from the other solutions provided here, I've decided to share it here as well
var numbers = [];
for (let i = 0; i < 8; i++) {
let a = true,
n;
while(a) {
n = Math.floor(Math.random() * 100) + 1;
a = numbers.includes(n);
}
numbers.push(n);
}
console.log(numbers);
Same permutation algorithm as The Machine Charmer, but with a prototyped implementation. Better suited to large number of picks. Uses js 1.7 destructuring assignment if available.
// swaps elements at index i and j in array this
// swapping is easy on js 1.7 (feature detection)
Array.prototype.swap = (function () {
var i=0, j=1;
try { [i,j]=[j,i]; }
catch (e) {}
if(i) {
return function(i,j) {
[this[i],this[j]] = [this[j],this[i]];
return this;
}
} else {
return function(i,j) {
var temp = this[i];
this[i] = this[j];
this[j] = temp;
return this;
}
}
})();
// shuffles array this
Array.prototype.shuffle = function() {
for(var i=this.length; i>1; i--) {
this.swap(i-1, Math.floor(i*Math.random()));
}
return this;
}
// returns n unique random numbers between min and max
function pick(n, min, max) {
var a = [], i = max;
while(i >= min) a.push(i--);
return a.shuffle().slice(0,n);
}
pick(8,1,100);
Edit:
An other proposition, better suited to small number of picks, based on belugabob's answer. To guarantee uniqueness, we remove the picked numbers from the array.
// removes n random elements from array this
// and returns them
Array.prototype.pick = function(n) {
if(!n || !this.length) return [];
var i = Math.floor(this.length*Math.random());
return this.splice(i,1).concat(this.pick(n-1));
}
// returns n unique random numbers between min and max
function pick(n, min, max) {
var a = [], i = max;
while(i >= min) a.push(i--);
return a.pick(n);
}
pick(8,1,100);
for arrays with holes like this [,2,,4,,6,7,,]
because my problem was to fill these holes. So I modified it as per my need :)
the following modified solution worked for me :)
var arr = [,2,,4,,6,7,,]; //example
while(arr.length < 9){
var randomnumber=Math.floor(Math.random()*9+1);
var found=false;
for(var i=0;i<arr.length;i++){
if(arr[i]==randomnumber){found=true;break;}
}
if(!found)
for(k=0;k<9;k++)
{if(!arr[k]) //if it's empty !!MODIFICATION
{arr[k]=randomnumber; break;}}
}
alert(arr); //outputs on the screen
The best earlier answer is the answer by sje397. You will get as good random numbers as you can get, as quick as possible.
My solution is very similar to his solution. However, sometimes you want the random numbers in random order, and that is why I decided to post an answer. In addition, I provide a general function.
function selectKOutOfN(k, n) {
if (k>n) throw "k>n";
var selection = [];
var sorted = [];
for (var i = 0; i < k; i++) {
var rand = Math.floor(Math.random()*(n - i));
for (var j = 0; j < i; j++) {
if (sorted[j]<=rand)
rand++;
else
break;
}
selection.push(rand);
sorted.splice(j, 0, rand);
}
return selection;
}
alert(selectKOutOfN(8, 100));
Here is my ES6 version I cobbled together. I'm sure it can be a little more consolidated.
function randomArray(i, min, max) {
min = Math.ceil(min);
max = Math.floor(max);
let arr = Array.from({length: i}, () => Math.floor(Math.random()* (max - min)) + min);
return arr.sort();
}
let uniqueItems = [...new Set(randomArray(8, 0, 100))]
console.log(uniqueItems);
How about using object properties as a hash table? This way your best scenario is to only randomize 8 times. It would only be effective if you want a small part of the range of numbers. It's also much less memory intensive than Fisher-Yates because you don't have to allocate space for an array.
var ht={}, i=rands=8;
while ( i>0 || keys(ht).length<rands) ht[Math.ceil(Math.random()*100)]=i--;
alert(keys(ht));
I then found out that Object.keys(obj) is an ECMAScript 5 feature so the above is pretty much useless on the internets right now. Fear not, because I made it ECMAScript 3 compatible by adding a keys function like this.
if (typeof keys == "undefined")
{
var keys = function(obj)
{
props=[];
for (k in ht) if (ht.hasOwnProperty(k)) props.push(k);
return props;
}
}
var bombout=0;
var checkArr=[];
var arr=[];
while(arr.length < 8 && bombout<100){
bombout++;
var randomNumber=Math.ceil(Math.random()*100);
if(typeof checkArr[randomNumber] == "undefined"){
checkArr[randomNumber]=1;
arr.push(randomNumber);
}
}
// untested - hence bombout
if you need more unique you must generate a array(1..100).
var arr=[];
function generateRandoms(){
for(var i=1;i<=100;i++) arr.push(i);
}
function extractUniqueRandom()
{
if (arr.length==0) generateRandoms();
var randIndex=Math.floor(arr.length*Math.random());
var result=arr[randIndex];
arr.splice(randIndex,1);
return result;
}
function extractUniqueRandomArray(n)
{
var resultArr=[];
for(var i=0;i<n;i++) resultArr.push(extractUniqueRandom());
return resultArr;
}
above code is faster:
extractUniqueRandomArray(50)=>
[2, 79, 38, 59, 63, 42, 52, 22, 78, 50, 39, 77, 1, 88, 40, 23, 48, 84, 91, 49, 4, 54, 93, 36, 100, 82, 62, 41, 89, 12, 24, 31, 86, 92, 64, 75, 70, 61, 67, 98, 76, 80, 56, 90, 83, 44, 43, 47, 7, 53]
Adding another better version of same code (accepted answer) with JavaScript 1.6 indexOf function. Do not need to loop thru whole array every time you are checking the duplicate.
var arr = []
while(arr.length < 8){
var randomnumber=Math.ceil(Math.random()*100)
var found=false;
if(arr.indexOf(randomnumber) > -1){found=true;}
if(!found)arr[arr.length]=randomnumber;
}
Older version of Javascript can still use the version at top
PS: Tried suggesting an update to the wiki but it was rejected. I still think it may be useful for others.
This is my personal solution :
<script>
var i, k;
var numbers = new Array();
k = Math.floor((Math.random()*8));
numbers[0]=k;
for (var j=1;j<8;j++){
k = Math.floor((Math.random()*8));
i=0;
while (i < numbers.length){
if (numbers[i] == k){
k = Math.floor((Math.random()*8));
i=0;
}else {i++;}
}
numbers[j]=k;
}
for (var j=0;j<8;j++){
alert (numbers[j]);
}
</script>
It randomly generates 8 unique array values (between 0 and 7), then displays them using an alert box.
function getUniqueRandomNos() {
var indexedArrayOfRandomNo = [];
for (var i = 0; i < 100; i++) {
var randNo = Math.random();
indexedArrayOfRandomNo.push([i, randNo]);
}
indexedArrayOfRandomNo.sort(function (arr1, arr2) {
return arr1[1] - arr2[1]
});
var uniqueRandNoArray = [];
for (i = 0; i < 8; i++) {
uniqueRandNoArray.push(indexedArrayOfRandomNo[i][0]);
}
return uniqueRandNoArray;
}
I think this method is different from methods given in most of the answers, so I thought I might add an answer here (though the question was asked 4 years ago).
We generate 100 random numbers, and tag each of them with numbers from 1 to 100. Then we sort these tagged random numbers, and the tags get shuffled randomly. Alternatively, as needed in this question, one could do away with just finding top 8 of the tagged random numbers. Finding top 8 items is cheaper than sorting the whole array.
One must note here, that the sorting algorithm influences this algorithm. If the sorting algorithm used is stable, there is slight bias in favor of smaller numbers. Ideally, we would want the sorting algorithm to be unstable and not even biased towards stability (or instability) to produce an answer with perfectly uniform probability distribution.
This can handle generating upto 20 digit UNIQUE random number
JS
var generatedNumbers = [];
function generateRandomNumber(precision) { // input --> number precision in integer
if (precision <= 20) {
var randomNum = Math.round(Math.random().toFixed(precision) * Math.pow(10, precision));
if (generatedNumbers.indexOf(randomNum) > -1) {
if (generatedNumbers.length == Math.pow(10, precision))
return "Generated all values with this precision";
return generateRandomNumber(precision);
} else {
generatedNumbers.push(randomNum);
return randomNum;
}
} else
return "Number Precision shoould not exceed 20";
}
generateRandomNumber(1);
jsFiddle
This solution uses the hash which is much more performant O(1) than checking if the resides in the array. It has extra safe checks too. Hope it helps.
function uniqueArray(minRange, maxRange, arrayLength) {
var arrayLength = (arrayLength) ? arrayLength : 10
var minRange = (minRange !== undefined) ? minRange : 1
var maxRange = (maxRange !== undefined) ? maxRange : 100
var numberOfItemsInArray = 0
var hash = {}
var array = []
if ( arrayLength > (maxRange - minRange) ) throw new Error('Cannot generate unique array: Array length too high')
while(numberOfItemsInArray < arrayLength){
// var randomNumber = Math.floor(Math.random() * (maxRange - minRange + 1) + minRange)
// following line used for performance benefits
var randomNumber = (Math.random() * (maxRange - minRange + 1) + minRange) << 0
if (!hash[randomNumber]) {
hash[randomNumber] = true
array.push(randomNumber)
numberOfItemsInArray++
}
}
return array
}
document.write(uniqueArray(1, 100, 8))
You can also do it with a one liner like this:
[...((add, set) => add(set, add))((set, add) => set.size < 8 ? add(set.add(Math.floor(Math.random()*100) + 1), add) : set, new Set())]
getRandom (min, max) {
return Math.floor(Math.random() * (max - min)) + min
}
getNRandom (min, max, n) {
const numbers = []
if (min > max) {
return new Error('Max is gt min')
}
if (min === max) {
return [min]
}
if ((max - min) >= n) {
while (numbers.length < n) {
let rand = this.getRandom(min, max + 1)
if (numbers.indexOf(rand) === -1) {
numbers.push(rand)
}
}
}
if ((max - min) < n) {
for (let i = min; i <= max; i++) {
numbers.push(i)
}
}
return numbers
}
Using a Set is your fastest option. Here is a generic function for getting a unique random that uses a callback generator. Now it's fast and reusable.
// Get a unique 'anything'
let unique = new Set()
function getUnique(generator) {
let number = generator()
while (!unique.add(number)) {
number = generator()
}
return number;
}
// The generator. Return anything, not just numbers.
const between_1_100 = () => 1 + Math.floor(Math.random() * 100)
// Test it
for (var i = 0; i < 8; i++) {
const aNumber = getUnique(between_1_100)
}
// Dump the 'stored numbers'
console.log(Array.from(unique))
This is a implementation of Fisher Yates/Durstenfeld Shuffle, but without actual creation of a array thus reducing space complexity or memory needed, when the pick size is small compared to the number of elements available.
To pick 8 numbers from 100, it is not necessary to create a array of 100 elements.
Assuming a array is created,
From the end of array(100), get random number(rnd) from 1 to 100
Swap 100 and the random number rnd
Repeat step 1 with array(99)
If a array is not created, A hashMap may be used to remember the actual swapped positions. When the second random number generated is equal to the one of the previously generated numbers, the map provides the current value in that position rather than the actual value.
const getRandom_ = (start, end) => {
return Math.floor(Math.random() * (end - start + 1)) + start;
};
const getRealValue_ = (map, rnd) => {
if (map.has(rnd)) {
return getRealValue_(map, map.get(rnd));
} else {
return rnd;
}
};
const getRandomNumbers = (n, start, end) => {
const out = new Map();
while (n--) {
const rnd = getRandom_(start, end--);
out.set(getRealValue_(out, rnd), end + 1);
}
return [...out.keys()];
};
console.info(getRandomNumbers(8, 1, 100));
console.info(getRandomNumbers(8, 1, Math.pow(10, 12)));
console.info(getRandomNumbers(800000, 1, Math.pow(10, 15)));
Here is an example of random 5 numbers taken from a range of 0 to 100 (both 0 and 100 included) with no duplication.
let finals = [];
const count = 5; // Considering 5 numbers
const max = 100;
for(let i = 0; i < max; i++){
const rand = Math.round(Math.random() * max);
!finals.includes(rand) && finals.push(rand)
}
finals = finals.slice(0, count)