We Keep Coding

Looping limited Objects in java script [duplicate]

I have an array with alot of items, and I am creating a list of them. I was thinking of paginating the list. I wonder how can I start a forEach or for loop at some index in an array, that would be in my example the number of items in the list on each page, so that I don't need to iterate over the whole array in each loop?
arr.forEach(function (item) {
someFn(item);
})
for (var i = 0, len = arr.length; i < len; i++) {
someFn(arr[i]);
}

You could use a copy of the array, by using Array#slice
The slice() method returns a shallow copy of a portion of an array into a new array object selected from begin to end (end not included). The original array will not be modified.
array.slice(10, 20).forEach(someFn); // only for functions which respects API of forEach*
* parameters for a callback
Or you can start at a given index and end at a given index.
for (var i = 10, len = Math.min(20, arr.length); i < len; i++) {
someFn(arr[i]);
}
With
Math.min(20, arr.length)
returns a value, if the array is smaller than the given value 20. For example if the array has only index 0 ... 14, you get as result 15.

Unfortunately Array#forEach iterates over every element in the given array, but you could apply a simple condition to determine to which elements (with specified index) apply the given function.
i > 3 ? someFn(item) : null;
^ if index more than 3 - call the function
var arr = [1,2,3,4,5,6,7];
function someFn(elem){
console.log(elem);
}
arr.forEach(function(item, i) {
return i > 3 ? someFn(item) : null;
})

forEach doesn't offer that feature, no. So your choices are:
A simple for loop
Ignoring the indexes you don't want to handle (as in Kind user's answer)
Using slice (as in Nina's answer)
Writing your own function
Here's #4 as an Array.prototype extension (non-enumerable, of course; adding enumerable properties to Array.prototype breaks a lot of code); after it is a standalone version for when adding to Array.prototype isn't appropriate:
// Giving ourselves the function
Object.defineProperty(Array.prototype, "myEach", {
value: function(from, to, callback, thisArg) {
if (typeof from === "function") {
thisArg = callback;
callback = to;
to = from;
from = 0;
}
if (typeof to === "function") {
thisArg = callback;
callback = to;
to = this.length;
}
for (var n = from; n < to; ++n) {
callback.call(thisArg, this[n], n, this);
}
}
});
// Using it:
var arr = ["zero", "one", "two", "three", "four", "five", "six", "seven"];
console.log("*** From 3:");
arr.myEach(3, function(e) { console.log(e); });
console.log("*** From 3 (inclusive) to 5 (exclusive):");
arr.myEach(3, 5, function(e) { console.log(e); });
console.log("*** All:");
arr.myEach(function(e) { console.log(e); });
console.log("*** Check thisArg handling on 0-2:");
var o = {answer: 42};
arr.myEach(0, 2, function(e) {
console.log(e + " (this.answer = " + this.answer + ")");
}, o);
.as-console-wrapper {
max-height: 100% !important;
}
Again note that that's a non-enumerable property, which is vital if you ever add anything to Array.prototype (otherwise, you break a lot of code).
You wouldn't do that in a library to be consumed by others, you'd just have a standalone function:
// Giving ourselves the function
function myEach(array, from, to, callback, thisArg) {
if (typeof from === "function") {
thisArg = callback;
callback = to;
to = from;
from = 0;
}
if (typeof to === "function") {
thisArg = callback;
callback = to;
to = array.length;
}
for (var n = from; n < to; ++n) {
callback.call(thisArg, array[n], n, array);
}
}
// Using it:
var arr = ["zero", "one", "two", "three", "four", "five", "six", "seven"];
console.log("*** From 3:");
myEach(arr, 3, function(e) {
console.log(e);
});
console.log("*** From 3 (inclusive) to 5 (exclusive):");
myEach(arr, 3, 5, function(e) {
console.log(e);
});
console.log("*** All:");
myEach(arr, function(e) {
console.log(e);
});
console.log("*** Check thisArg handling on 0-2:");
var o = {answer: 42};
myEach(arr, 0, 2, function(e) {
console.log(e + " (this.answer = " + this.answer + ")");
}, o);
.as-console-wrapper {
max-height: 100% !important;
}

Thinking on what #NinaScholz commented, perhaps you can use variables and any changes would be set in those instead of changing the loop.
function someFn(item, array2){
array2.push(item, array2);
}
var arrayItems1 = [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10];
var arrayItems2 = [];
var firstIndex = 1;
var lastIndex = 5;
var i = 0;
for (i = firstIndex; i < lastIndex; i++){
someFn(arrayItems1[i], arrayItems2);
}
alert(arrayItems2.join(' '));

You could apply some kind of implementation of the iterator pattern.
var Iterator = function (list, position) {
return {
isNext: function () {
return position + 1 < list.length;
},
isDefined: function () {
return (position < list.length && position >= 0);
},
element: function () {
return list[position];
},
position: function () {
return position;
},
moveNext: function () {
if (this.isNext()) { return Iterator(list, position + 1); }
return Iterator([], 0);
}
}
Iterator.forEach = function (action, iterator, length) {
var counter = 0;
while (counter < length && iterator.isDefined()) {
counter = counter + 1;
action(iterator.element(), iterator.position());
iterator = iterator.moveNext();
}
return iterator;
}
And then have an iterator to use for going over the list and keep the state of the last iteration over a list.
var list = [1, 3, 5, 3, 6];
var iterator = Iterator(list, 0);
iterator = Iterator.forEach(function (element, index) {
console.log(element, index);
}, iterator, 3);
//1 0
//3 1
//5 2
Iterator.forEach(function (element, index) {
console.log(element, index);
}, iterator, 5);
//3 3
//6 4

array.values() to get the iterator, .next() it and use it.
let ar=[1,2,3,4]
var _;for(let a of(_=ar.values(),_.next(),_)){
console.log(a)
}

Currying a function that takes infinite arguments

Using ES5, how do you curry a function that takes infinite arguments.
function add(a, b, c) {
return a + b + c;
}
The function above takes only three arguments but we want our curried version to be able to take infinite arguments.
Hence, of all the following test cases should pass:
var test = add(1);
test(2); //should return 3
test(2,3); //should return 6
test(4,5,6); //should return 16
Here is the solution that I came up with:
function add(a, b, c) {
var args = Array.prototype.slice.call(arguments);
return function () {
var secondArgs = Array.prototype.slice.call(arguments);
var totalArguments = secondArgs.concat(args);
var sum = 0;
for (i = 0; i < totalArguments.length; i++) {
sum += totalArguments[0];
}
return sum;
}
}
However, I have been told that it's not very “functional” in style.

Part of the reason your add function is not very "functional" is because it is attempting to do more than just add up numbers passed to it. It would be confusing for other developers to look at your code, see an add function, and when they call it, get a function returned to them instead of the sum.
For example:
//Using your add function, I'm expecting 6
add(1,2,3) //Returns another function = confusing!
The functional approach
The functional approach would be to create a function that allows you to curry any other functions, and simplify your add function:
function curry(fn) {
var args = Array.prototype.slice.call(arguments, 1);
return function () {
return fn.apply(this, args.concat(
Array.prototype.slice.call(arguments, 0)
));
}
}
function add() {
var args = Array.prototype.slice.call(arguments);
return args.reduce(function (previousValue, currentValue) {
return previousValue + currentValue;
});
}
Now, if you want to curry this function, you would just do:
var curry1 = curry(add, 1);
console.log(
curry1(2), // Logs 3
curry1(2, 3), // Logs 6
curry1(4, 5, 6) // Logs 16
);
//You can do this with as many arguments as you want
var curry15 = curry(add, 1,2,3,4,5);
console.log(curry15(6,7,8,9)); // Logs 45
If I still want to add 1, 2, 3 up I can just do:
add(1,2,3) //Returns 6, AWESOME!
Continuing the functional approach
This code is now becoming reusable from everywhere.
You can use that curry function to make other curried function references without any additional hassle.
Sticking with the math theme, lets say we had a multiply function that multiplied all numbers passed to it:
function multiply() {
var args = Array.prototype.slice.call(arguments);
return args.reduce(function (previousValue, currentValue) {
return previousValue * currentValue;
});
}
multiply(2,4,8) // Returns 64
var curryMultiply2 = curry(multiply, 2);
curryMultiply2(4,8) // Returns 64
This functional currying approach allows you take that approach to any function, not just mathematical ones. Although the supplied curry function does not support all edge cases, it offers a functional, simple solution to your problem that can easily be built upon.

Method 1: Using partial
A simple solution would be to use partial as follows:
Function.prototype.partial = function () {
var args = Array.prototype.concat.apply([null], arguments);
return Function.prototype.bind.apply(this, args);
};
var test = add.partial(1);
alert(test(2)); // 3
alert(test(2,3)); // 6
alert(test(4,5,6)); // 16
function add() {
var sum = 0;
var length = arguments.length;
for (var i = 0; i < length; i++)
sum += arguments[i];
return sum;
}
Method 2: Single Level Currying
If you only want one level of currying then this is what I would do:
var test = add(1);
alert(test(2)); // 3
alert(test(2,3)); // 6
alert(test(4,5,6)); // 16
function add() {
var runningTotal = 0;
var length = arguments.length;
for (var i = 0; i < length; i++)
runningTotal += arguments[i];
return function () {
var sum = runningTotal;
var length = arguments.length;
for (var i = 0; i < length; i++)
sum += arguments[i];
return sum;
};
}
Method 3: Infinite Level Currying
Now, here's a more general solution with infinite levels of currying:
var add = running(0);
var test = add(1);
alert(+test(2)); // 3
alert(+test(2,3)); // 6
alert(+test(4,5,6)); // 16
function running(total) {
var summation = function () {
var sum = total;
var length = arguments.length;
for (var i = 0; i < length; i++)
sum += arguments[i];
return running(sum);
}
summation.valueOf = function () {
return total;
};
return summation;
}
A running total is the intermediate result of a summation. The running function returns another function which can be treated as a number (e.g. you can do 2 * running(21)). However, because it's also a function you can apply it (e.g. you can do running(21)(21)). It works because JavaScript uses the valueOf method to automatically coerce objects into primitives.
Furthermore, the function produced by running is recursively curried allowing you to apply it as many times to as many arguments as you wish.
var resultA = running(0);
var resultB = resultA(1,2);
var resultC = resultB(3,4,5);
var resultD = resultC(6,7,8,9);
alert(resultD + resultD(10)); // 100
function running(total) {
var summation = function () {
var sum = total;
var length = arguments.length;
for (var i = 0; i < length; i++)
sum += arguments[i];
return running(sum);
}
summation.valueOf = function () {
return total;
};
return summation;
}
The only thing you need to be aware of is that sometimes you need to manually coerce the result of running into a number by either applying the unary plus operator to it or calling its valueOf method directly.

Similar to the above problem. Sum of nth level curry by recursion
Trick: To stop the recursion I'm passing last () as blank**
function sum(num1) {
return (num2) => {
if(!num2) {
return num1;
}
return sum(num1 + num2);
}
}
console.log('Sum :', sum(1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6)(7)(8)())

There is more generic approach by defining a curry function that takes minimum number of arguments when it evaluates the inner function. Let me use ES6 first (ES5 later), since it makes it more transparent:
var curry = (n, f, ...a) => a.length >= n
? f(...a)
: (...ia) => curry(n, f, ...[...a, ...ia]);
Then define a function that sums all arguments:
var sum = (...args) => args.reduce((a, b) => a + b);
then we can curry it, telling that it should wait until at least 2 arguments:
var add = curry(2, sum);
Then it all fits into place:
add(1, 2, 3) // returns 6
var add1 = add(1);
add1(2) // returns 3
add1(2,3) // returns 6
add1(4,5,6) // returns 16
You can even skip creating add by providing the first argument(s):
var add1 = curry(2, sum, 1);
ES5 version of curry is not as pretty for the lack of ... operator:
function curry(n, f) {
var a = [].slice.call(arguments, 2);
return a.length >= n
? f.apply(null, a)
: function () {
var ia = [].slice.call(arguments);
return curry.apply(null, [n, f].concat(a).concat(ia));
};
}
function sum() {
return [].slice.call(arguments).reduce(function (a, b) {
return a + b;
});
};
The rest is the same...
Note: If efficiency is a concern, you may not want to use slice on arguments, but copy it to a new array explicitly.

Bit late in this game, but here is my two cents. Basically this exploits the fact that functions are also objects in JavaScript.
function add(x) {
if (x === undefined) {
return add.numbers.reduce((acc, elem) => acc + elem, 0);
} else {
if (add.numbers) {
add.numbers.push(x);
} else {
add.numbers = [x];
}
}
return add;
}

Infinite sum with currying, you can pass a single parameter or multiple up-to infinite:
function adding(...arg) {
return function clousureReturn(...arg1) {
if (!arguments.length) {
let finalArr = [...arg, ...arg1];
let total = finalArr.reduce((sum, ele) => sum + ele);
return total;
}
return adding(...arg, ...arg1)
}
}

This is my solution for single level currying
function sum() {
let args = [...arguments];
let total = args.reduce((total,num) => total + num,0);
return total;
}
console.log(sum(1,2,3,4)) // 10
and the solution for infinite level currying
let sum= function (...args1) {
let total =args1.reduce((total,num) => total + num,0)
return function(...args2) {
if(args2.length!== 0) {
let total2 = args2.reduce((total,num)=>total + num,0);
return sum(total,total2);
}
return total;
};
};
console.log(sum(2,3,4)(2,3)(1)()); // 15

Simple solution
const add = (one) => { // one: Parameter passed in test
return (...args) => {
// args: Array with all the parameters passed in test
return one + args.reduce((sum, i) => sum + i, 0) // using reduce for doing sum
}
}
var test = add(1);
console.log(test(2)); //should return 3
console.log(test(2, 3)); //should return 6
console.log(test(4, 5, 6)); //should return 16

Hashing array of strings in javascript

Just wondering if there is some other way than this.
var hashStringArray = function(array) {
array.sort();
return array.join('|');
};
I don't like sorting much and using that delimiter is not safe either if it's contained in one of the strings. In overall I need to produce same hash no matter the order of strings. It will be rather short arrays (up to 10 items), but it will be required very often so it shouldn't be too slow.
I intend to use it with ES6 Map object and I need to easily find same array collection.
Updated example of use
var theMap = new Map();
var lookup = function(arr) {
var item = null;
var hashed = hashStringArray(arr);
if (item = theMap.get( hashed )) {
return item;
}
theMap.set( hashed, itemBasedOnInput );
return itemBasedOnInput;
}
var arr1 = ['alpha','beta','gama'];
var arr2 = ['beta','alpha','gama'];
lookup(arr1) === lookup(arr2)
Performance tests
http://jsperf.com/hashing-array-of-strings/5

Two things occurred to me as the basis of a solution:
summing doesn't depend on order, which is actually a flaw in simple checksums (they don't catch changes in block order within a word), and
we can convert strings to summable numbers using their charcodes
Here's a function to do (2) :
charsum = function(s) {
var i, sum = 0;
for (i = 0; i < s.length; i++) {
sum += (s.charCodeAt(i) * (i+1));
}
return sum
}
Here's a version of (1) that computes an array hash by summing the charsum values:
array_hash = function(a) {
var i, sum = 0
for (i = 0; i < a.length; i++) {
var cs = charsum(a[i])
sum = sum + (65027 / cs)
}
return ("" + sum).slice(0,16)
}
Fiddle here: http://jsfiddle.net/WS9dC/11/
If we did a straight sum of the charsum values, then the array ["a", "d"] would have the same hash as the array ["b", "c"] - leading to undesired collisions. So based on using non-UTF strings, where charcodes go up to 255, and allowing for 255 characters in each string, then the max return value of charsum is 255 * 255 = 65025. So I picked the next prime number up, 65027, and used (65027 / cs) to compute the hash. I am not 100% convinced this removes collisions... perhaps more thought needed... but it certainly fixes the [a, d] versus [b, c] case.
Testing:
var arr1 = ['alpha','beta','gama'];
var arr2 = ['beta','alpha','gama'];
console.log(array_hash(arr1))
console.log(array_hash(arr2))
console.log(array_hash(arr1) == array_hash(arr2))
Outputs:
443.5322979371356
443.5322979371356
true
And testing a case that shows different hashes:
var arr3 = ['a', 'd'];
var arr4 = ['b', 'c'];
console.log(array_hash(arr3))
console.log(array_hash(arr4))
console.log(array_hash(arr3) == array_hash(arr4))
outputs:
1320.651443298969
1320.3792001649144
false
Edit:
Here's a revised version, which ignore duplicates from the arrays as it goes, and return the hash based on unique items only:
http://jsfiddle.net/WS9dC/7/
array_hash = function(a) {
var i, sum = 0, product = 1
for (i = 0; i < a.length; i++) {
var cs = charsum(a[i])
if (product % cs > 0) {
product = product * cs
sum = sum + (65027 / cs)
}
}
return ("" + sum).slice(0, 16)
}
testing:
var arr1 = ['alpha', 'beta', 'gama', 'delta', 'theta', 'alpha', 'gama'];
var arr2 = ["beta", "gama", "alpha", "theta", "delta", "beta"];
console.log(array_hash(arr1))
console.log(array_hash(arr2))
console.log(array_hash(arr1) === array_hash(arr2))
returns:
689.878503111701
689.878503111701
true
Edit
I've revised the answer above to account for arrays of words that have the same letters. We need these to return different hashes, which they now do:
var arr1 = ['alpha', 'beta']
var arr2 = ['alhpa', 'ateb']
The fix was to add a multiplier to the charsum func based on the char index:
sum += (s.charCodeAt(i) * (i+1));

If you calculate a numeric hash code for each string, then you can combine them with an operator where the order doesn't matter, like the ^ XOR operator, then you don't need to sort the array:
function hashStringArray(array) {
var code = 0;
for (var i = 0; i < array.length; i++) {
var n = 0;
for (var j = 0; j < array[i].length; j++) {
n = n * 251 ^ array[i].charCodeAt(j);
}
code ^= n;
}
return code
};

You can do this:
var hashStringArray = function(array) {
return array.sort().join('\u200b');
};
The \u200b character is an unicode character that also means null, but is not the same as the \0 character, which is most widely used.
'\u200b' == '\0'
> false

An idea to have very fast hash if your set of possible string is less than 32 items long : hash the string with a built-in hash function that will return power-of two as hash :
function getStringHash(aString) {
var currentPO2 = 0;
var hashSet = [];
getStringHash = function ( aString) {
var aHash = hashSet[aString];
if (aHash) return aHash;
aHash = 1 << currentPO2++;
hashSet[aString] = aHash;
return aHash;
}
return getStringHash(aString);
}
Then use this hash on your string array, ORing the hashes ( | ) :
function getStringArrayHash( aStringArray) {
var aHash = 0;
for (var i=0; i<aStringArray.length; i++) {
aHash |= getStringHash(aStringArray[i]);
}
return aHash;
}
So to test a bit :
console.log(getStringHash('alpha')); // 1
console.log(getStringHash('beta')); // 2
console.log(getStringHash('gamma')); // 4
console.log(getStringHash('alpha')); // 1 again
var arr1 = ['alpha','beta','gama'];
var arr2 = ['beta','alpha','gama'];
var arr3 = ['alpha', 'teta'];
console.log(getStringArrayHash(arr1)); // 11
console.log(getStringArrayHash(arr2)); // 11 also, like for arr1
var arr3 = ['alpha', 'teta'];
console.log(getStringArrayHash(arr3)); // 17 : a different array has != hashset
jsbin is here : http://jsbin.com/rozanufa/1/edit?js,console
RQ !!! with this method, arrays are considered as set, meaning that a repeated item won't change the hash of an array !!!
This HAS to be faster since it uses only 1) function call 2) lookup 3) integer arithmetic.
So no sort, no (long) string, no concat.
jsperf confirms that :
http://jsperf.com/hashing-array-of-strings/4
EDIT :
version with prime numbers, here : http://jsbin.com/rozanufa/3/edit?js,console
// return the unique prime associated with the string.
function getPrimeStringHash(aString) {
var hashSet = [];
var currentPrimeIndex = 0;
var primes = [ 2, 3, 5, 7, 11, 13, 17 ];
getPrimeStringHash = function ( aString) {
var aPrime = hashSet[aString];
if (aPrime) return aPrime;
if (currentPrimeIndex == primes.length) aPrime = getNextPrime();
else aPrime = primes[currentPrimeIndex];
currentPrimeIndex++
hashSet[aString] = aPrime;
return aPrime;
};
return getPrimeStringHash(aString);
// compute next prime number, store it and returns it.
function getNextPrime() {
var pr = primes[primes.length-1];
do {
pr+=2;
var divides = false;
// discard the number if it divides by one earlier prime.
for (var i=0; i<primes.length; i++) {
if ( ( pr % primes[i] ) == 0 ) {
divides = true;
break;
}
}
} while (divides == true)
primes.push(pr);
return pr;
}
}
function getStringPrimeArrayHash( aStringArray) {
var primeMul = 1;
for (var i=0; i<aStringArray.length; i++) {
primeMul *= getPrimeStringHash(aStringArray[i]);
}
return primeMul;
}
function compareByPrimeHash( aStringArray, anotherStringArray) {
var mul1 = getStringPrimeArrayHash ( aStringArray ) ;
var mul2 = getStringPrimeArrayHash ( anotherStringArray ) ;
return ( mul1 > mul2 ) ?
! ( mul1 % mul2 )
: ! ( mul2 % mul1 );
// Rq : just test for mul1 == mul2 if you are sure there's no duplicates
}
Tests :
console.log(getPrimeStringHash('alpha')); // 2
console.log(getPrimeStringHash('beta')); // 3
console.log(getPrimeStringHash('gamma')); // 5
console.log(getPrimeStringHash('alpha')); // 2 again
console.log(getPrimeStringHash('a1')); // 7
console.log(getPrimeStringHash('a2')); // 11
var arr1 = ['alpha','beta','gamma'];
var arr2 = ['beta','alpha','gamma'];
var arr3 = ['alpha', 'teta'];
var arr4 = ['alpha','beta','gamma', 'alpha']; // == arr1 + duplicate 'alpha'
console.log(getStringPrimeArrayHash(arr1)); // 30
console.log(getStringPrimeArrayHash(arr2)); // 30 also, like for arr1
var arr3 = ['alpha', 'teta'];
console.log(getStringPrimeArrayHash(arr3)); // 26 : a different array has != hashset
console.log(compareByPrimeHash(arr1, arr2) ); // true
console.log(compareByPrimeHash(arr1, arr3) ); // false
console.log(compareByPrimeHash(arr1, arr4) ); // true despite duplicate

Is there a more concise way to initialize empty multidimensional arrays?

I've been trying to find a reasonably concise way to set the dimensions of an empty multidimensional JavaScript array, but with no success so far.
First, I tried to initialize an empty 10x10x10 array using var theArray = new Array(10, 10 10), but instead, it only created a 1-dimensional array with 3 elements.
I've figured out how to initialize an empty 10x10x10 array using nested for-loops, but it's extremely tedious to write the array initializer this way. Initializing multidimensional arrays using nested for-loops can be quite tedious: is there a more concise way to set the dimensions of empty multidimensional arrays in JavaScript (with arbitrarily many dimensions)?
//Initializing an empty 10x10x10 array:
var theArray = new Array();
for(var a = 0; a < 10; a++){
theArray[a] = new Array();
for(var b = 0; b < 10; b++){
theArray[a][b] = new Array();
for(var c = 0; c < 10; c++){
theArray[a][b][c] = 10
}
}
}
console.log(JSON.stringify(theArray));

Adapted from this answer:
function createArray(length) {
var arr = new Array(length || 0),
i = length;
if (arguments.length > 1) {
var args = Array.prototype.slice.call(arguments, 1);
while(i--) arr[i] = createArray.apply(this, args);
}
return arr;
}
Simply call with an argument for the length of each dimension.
Usage examples:
var multiArray = createArray(10,10,10); Gives a 3-dimensional array of equal length.
var weirdArray = createArray(34,6,42,2); Gives a 4-dimensional array of unequal lengths.

function multiDimArrayInit(dimensions, leafValue) {
if (!dimensions.length) {
return leafValue;
}
var arr = [];
var subDimensions = dimensions.slice(1);
for (var i = 0; i < dimensions[0]; i++) {
arr.push(multiDimArrayInit(subDimensions, leafValue));
}
return arr;
}
console.log(multiDimArrayInit([2,8], "hi")); // counting the nested "hi"'s yields 16 of them
demo http://jsfiddle.net/WPrs3/

Here is my take on the problem: nArray utility function
function nArray() {
var arr = new Array();
var args = Array.prototype.slice.call(arguments, 1);
for(var i=0;i<arguments[0];i++) {
arr[i] = (arguments.length > 1 && nArray.apply(this, args)) || undefined;
}
return arr;
}
Usage example:
var arr = nArray(3, 3, 3);
Results in 3x3x3 array of undefined values.
Running code with some tests also available as a Fiddle here: http://jsfiddle.net/EqT3r/7/

The more dimension you have, the more you have interest in using one single flat array and a getter /setter function for your array.
Because for a [d1 X d2 X d3 X .. X dn] you'll be creating d2*d3*...*dn arrays instead of one, and when accessing, you'll make n indirection instead of 1.
The interface would look like :
var myNArray = new NArray(10,20,10);
var oneValue = myNArray.get(5,8,3);
myNArray.set(8,3,2, 'the value of (8,3,2)');
the implementation depends on your preference for a fixed-size
n-dimensionnal array or an array able to push/pop and the like.

A more succinct version of #chris code:
function multiDim (dims, leaf) {
dims = Array.isArray (dims) ? dims.slice () : [dims];
return Array.apply (null, Array (dims.shift ())).map (function (v, i) {
return dims.length
? multiDim (dims, typeof leaf == 'string' ? leaf.replace ('%i', i + ' %i') : leaf)
: typeof leaf == 'string' ? leaf.replace ('%i', i) : leaf;
});
}
console.log (JSON.stringify (multiDim ([2,2], "hi %i"), null, ' '));
Produces :
[
[
"hi 0 0",
"hi 0 1"
],
[
"hi 1 0",
"hi 1 1"
]
]
In this version you can pass the first argument as a number for single dimension array.
Including %i in the leaf value will provide index values in the leaf values.
Play with it at : http://jsfiddle.net/jstoolsmith/r3eMR/

Very simple function, generate an array with any number of dimensions. Specify length of each dimension and the content which for me is '' usually
function arrayGen(content,dims,dim1Len,dim2Len,dim3Len...) {
var args = arguments;
function loop(dim) {
var array = [];
for (var a = 0; a < args[dim + 1]; a++) {
if (dims > dim) {
array[a] = loop(dim + 1);
} else if (dims == dim) {
array[a] = content;
}
}
return array;
}
var thisArray = loop(1);
return thisArray;
};
I use this function very often, it saves a lot of time

JS calculate mean of same elements in 2d array

I've got a 'table' of two columns represented as an array. The first column are numbers from 1 to 20 and they are labels, the second column are the corresponding values (seconds):
my_array = [ [ 3,4,5,3,4,5,2 ],[ 12,14,16,11,12,10,20 ] ];
I need the mean (average) for each label:
my_mean_array = [ [ 2,3,4,5 ],[ 20/1, (12+11)/2, (14+12)/2, (16+10)/2 ] ];
// edit: The mean should be a float - the notion above is just for clarification.
// Also the number 'labels' should remain as numbers/integers.
My try:
var a = my_array[0];
var b = my_array[1];
m = [];
n = [];
for( var i = 0; a.length; i++){
m[ a[i] ] += b[i]; // accumulate the values in the corresponding place
n[ a[i] ] += 1; // count the occurences
}
var o = [];
var p = [];
o = m / n;
p.push(n);
p.push(o);

How about this (native JS, will not break on older browsers):
function arrayMean(ary) {
var index = {}, i, label, value, result = [[],[]];
for (i = 0; i < ary[0].length; i++) {
label = ary[0][i];
value = ary[1][i];
if (!(label in index)) {
index[label] = {sum: 0, occur: 0};
}
index[label].sum += value;
index[label].occur++;
}
for (i in index) {
if (index.hasOwnProperty(i)) {
result[0].push(parseInt(i, 10));
result[1].push(index[i].occur > 0 ? index[i].sum / index[i].occur : 0);
}
}
return result;
}
FWIW, if you want fancy I've created a few other ways to do it. They depend on external libraries and are very probably an order of magnitude slower than a native solution. But they are nicer to look at.
It could look like this, with underscore.js:
function arrayMeanUnderscore(ary) {
return _.chain(ary[0])
.zip(ary[1])
.groupBy(function (item) { return item[0]; })
.reduce(function(memo, items) {
var values = _.pluck(items, 1),
toSum = function (a, b) { return a + b; };
memo[0].push(items[0][0]);
memo[1].push(_(values).reduce(toSum) / values.length);
return memo;
}, [[], []])
.value();
}
// --------------------------------------------
arrayMeanUnderscore([[3,4,5,3,4,5,2], [12,14,16,11,12,10,20]]);
// -> [[2,3,4,5], [20,11.5,13,13]]
or like this, with the truly great linq.js (I've used v2.2):
function arrayMeanLinq(ary) {
return Enumerable.From(ary[0])
.Zip(ary[1], "[$, $$]")
.GroupBy("$[0]")
.Aggregate([[],[]], function (result, item) {
result[0].push(item.Key());
result[1].push(item.Average("$[1]"));
return result;
});
}
// --------------------------------------------
arrayMeanLinq([[3,4,5,3,4,5,2], [12,14,16,11,12,10,20]]);
// -> [[3,4,5,2], [11.5,13,13,20]]
As suspected, the "fancy" implementations are an order of magnitude slower than a native implementation: jsperf comparison.

var temp = {};
my_array[0].map(function(label, i) {
if (! temp[label])
{
temp[label] = [];
}
temp[label].push(my_array[1][i]);
});
var result = [ [], [] ];
for (var label in temp) {
result[0].push(label);
result[1].push(
temp[label].reduce(function(p, v) { return p + v }) / temp[label].length
);
}

This function do not sort the resulted array like in your result example. If you need sorting, just say me and i will add it.
function getMeanArray(my_array)
{
m = {}; //id={count,value}
for( var i = 0; i<my_array[0].length; i++){
if (m[my_array[0][i]]===undefined)
{
m[my_array[0][i]]={count:0, value:0};
}
m[ my_array[0][i] ].value += my_array[1][i]; // accumulate the values in the corresponding place
m[ my_array[0][i] ].count++; // count the occurences
}
var my_mean_array=[[],[]];
for (var id in m)
{
my_mean_array[0].push(id);
my_mean_array[1].push(m[id].count!=0?m[id].value/m[id].count:0);
}
return my_mean_array;
}