Javascript Object scope - javascript

This is a simplification of something that I've come up against in a larger project so I hope it makes sense.
I have two Objects:
FirstObj = {
data : [],
init : function()
{
for(var a = 0; a < 20; a++)
{
this.data[a] = 1;
}
}
};
SecondObj = {
init : function()
{
var cell = FirstObj.data[0];
cell = 0;
}
};
I then call the two init methods and log the results:
(function(){
FirstObj.init();
SecondObj.init();
console.log(FirstObj.data);
})()
Now, I was assuming - based on my basis in Actionscript - that the log would show an Array in which the first item is a 0 and the rest all 1 but the 0 does not seem to stick.
Why does the assignment of the 0 value not succeed here and yet works fine if, instead of cell = 0 I target directly at FirstObj.data[0] = 0.
I'm guessing this is a scope thing and I can work round it but I'm trying to get a proper understanding of how JS actually handles this stuff, especially when lumping code into Objects like this (as an aside, is this a good approach in peoples general opinion?).
Thank for any help.

Numbers in JavaScript are something called primitive value types (alongside strings, booleans null and undefined).
This means, that when you do
var cell = FirstObj.data[0];
You're passing the value in FirstObj.data[0] and not a refernece to it.
What you're doing is like:
var x = 5;
var y = x; // y is now 5
y = 4; // y is 4, x is still 5.
Of course, something like FirstObj.data[0] = 0 should work.

Array indexing returns values in Javascript, not references. It means that once data[0] is assigned to cell, further modification of cell will not affect data[0].
Assigning the array itself would result in the behavior you're looking for:
SecondObj = {
init : function()
{
var cells = FirstObj.data;
cells[0] = 0; // Will also affect data[0].
}
};

Related

Dynamic variable declaration. Is this even the right method?

A little new to JS so be gentle :)
I'm trying to create a program that holds 5000+ boolean values that dynamically change based on other vars.
const chars = "abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz0";
const charsC = "ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ0"
const maxNum = 48;
const maxTile = 6;
var tile1, tile2, tile3, tile4, tile5, tile6
// test vars
var tile4 = "A27"
var t4a27 = false
// this snippet will be in an interval loop
for (let i = 1; i <= maxTile; ++i) {
for (let n = 0; n < chars.length; ++n) {
for (let j = 1; j <= maxNum; ++j) {
// this obviously doesnt work
var t[i][`${chars[n]}`][j];
// ^ ^ ^
if (tile[i] == `${charsC[n]}${j}`) {
t[i][h][j] = true;
console.log(t4a27)
} else {
t[i][h][j] = false;
}
}
}
}
For clarification a better word than "tile" for the vars could be "sprite" rather because its a point on the sprite.
The basic concept is the tile vars are designed to output their current position as a string value e.g. "A27". Then this loop will take that information and scan each tile subset to be true/false. So if the sprite lower right quadrant is inside "A27" the output would be t4a27 = true
In practice I can do this with just a lot of code (over 20,000 lines) but I figured their has to be an easier way that requires far less code.
This is probably not the right approach for your problem.
If you really need to store this amount of variables, it is probably best to put them in an object like so:
var tiles = {}
var tileName = 'abc'
// Dynamic setting:
tile[tileName] = true
// Dynamic reading:
console.log(tile[tileName])
I am wondering if you really want to store 5000 variables or if there is another way to calculate them at the time you need time, but that requires a bit more knowledge of the problem.
Javascript doesn't have this kind of ability to reflect local variables.
What you can do is attach all those variables to a global object, and proceed with: Object.keys(your_object) and your_object[key_name_here] = ...
I think you should use a 2-dim array for this. Or use a regular array of booleans with the appropriate size and do the index-magic yourself.
As you said, you are running on coordinates. A-27 is the same as row(1)+field(27) -- considering A is 1
If your field is 500x100, you create an Array as such: let gamefield = Array(500*100);
Warning: I have not tested this for syntax errors, but you should get the idea.
let gamefield = Array(500*100);
// optional gamefield.fill(true);
let row = idx => idx * 500;
let posIdx = (r, c) => row(r) + c;
// there is a sprite with a tiles property that returns
// 4 index positions for the sprite's quadrants as [r,c]
let quadrants = sprite.tiles.reportPositions()
// filter the quadrants where the gamefield at r,c is true
// this might also be a good case for some() instead of filter()
let collisions = quadrants.filter(pos => return gamefield[posIdx(...pos)]);
// if there is any of these, you can kill the sprite.
if(collisions.length > 0) sprite.kill();

iterating through and changing nodes in singly linked list

The problem is I don't understand why this code works. It works, but I just can't wrap my mind around it. Here's a function that deletes a node from a singly linked list. I feel like it shouldn't work because it's not actually changing any of the elements in the list, I'm just changing the value of a variable I have set equal to something in the list. In other words, when I create a "runner" variable to iterate through the list, why are the changes I make to "runner" actually changing the list itself. Analogously, if I do
var x = 1
var y = x
y = 2
Obviously, x is still going to equal 1. Why isn't the same true for my Linked List "runner". In the deleteNode function below, why does changing the runner.next value actually change anything in the node or list that exists outside of the function?
function deleteNode(head, position) {
var runner = head
var counter = 0
while (runner) {
if (counter == position - 1) {
runner.next = runner.next.next
return head;
}
runner = runner.next
counter++
}
}
Its because runner is an object, and so the runner variable is a reference to that object.
for example
const x = {a:1}
const y = x;
x.a = 3
console.log(y.a) // this will print 3 also

Trouble with closure in Javascript loop

The process: In the game I'm making, there's a for loop that's supposed to save a value in an array. That value changes with each iteration. The problem: when the loop is done running, every element of the array is identical, all showing the most recent value.
I know this issue is common, and I've made so many different tweaks and attempts at solving it over the past 2 days.
0) I tried separating things into separate functions as much as possible.
1) I tried defining my loop counters with "let" so they would have a local scope.
2) I tried wrapping my assignment in a self-executing function so it would happen immediately, preserving the value of currentlyOn before the next loop iteration changes it. My counter is the variable c.
(function(c2, currentlyOn2) {
onAtSameTime[c2] = currentlyOn2;
return 0;
})(c, currentlyOn);
3) I tried attempt #2 with the added feature of returning a function, which still didn't save the value of currentlyOn. This option isn't a good one for me anyway, because the whole point is that I'm doing some computations ahead of time so my game will have a quick animation loop.
onAtSameTime[c] = (function(currentlyOn2) {
return function() {
return currentlyOn2;
};
})(currentlyOn);
I'm tired of beating my head against this wall. Can anyone explain what I'm doing wrong?
For more details, check out the jsfiddle I made. The problem area is at line 59, using a simple assignment:
onAtSameTime[c] = currentlyOn;
onAtSameTime[c] = currentlyOn; sets onAtSameTime[c] equal to the reference of currentlyOn, since currentlyOn is an array, not a primitive value. That reference gets updated with each iteration. You could work around that by creating a copy of the array before adding it to the onAtSameTime array. Something like onAtSameTime[c] = [].concat(currentlyOn); would do the trick.
See this fork of your JSFiddle: https://jsfiddle.net/L2by787y/
You could make a copy from currentlyOn for assigning to onAtSameTime[c]. This keeps the values, but does not keep the reference to the same array.
onAtSameTime[c] = currentlyOn.slice(); // use copy
"use strict";
function log(text) {
document.getElementById("logbox").innerHTML += JSON.stringify(text) + "<br>";
return 0;
}
function whichSwitchesAreOn() {
var currentlyOn = [],
flickedSet,
flickedOne,
turningOnCheck;
for (var c = 0; c < switchesToggled.length; c++) {
flickedSet = switchesToggled[c];
for (var d = 0; d < flickedSet.length; d++) {
flickedOne = flickedSet[d];
turningOnCheck = currentlyOn.indexOf(flickedOne);
if (turningOnCheck == -1) {
currentlyOn.push(flickedOne);
} else {
currentlyOn.splice(turningOnCheck, 1);
}
}
log("currentlyOn: " + currentlyOn);
onAtSameTime[c] = currentlyOn.slice(); // use copy
}
return 0;
}
var switchesToggled = [[0], [1, 2], [0], [2], []],
onAtSameTime = [];
whichSwitchesAreOn();
log(onAtSameTime);
<div id="logbox"></div>
You say you have tried let?
Did you have let currentlyOn = [] inside of the for loop?
for(var c = 0; c < switchesToggled.length; c++) {
let currentlyOn = [];

JavaScript: Cannot set property of undefined

I'm pretty new to JS and I'm trying to wrap my head around the object topic in JS.
What I'm trying to do is to set a property of an object prototype to an uninitialized array, so that I can later add multiple objects to that array (for instances of the prototype object)
My code looks like this so far:
function cocktail(){
this.prototype.ingredients = [];
this.printIngredients = function() {
var i;
for (i = 0; i<this.ingredients.length; ++i) {
console.log(this.ingredients.fluid);
console.log(this.ingredients.amount);
}
}
}
var Mojito = new cocktail();
Mojito.ingredients.push({"fluid":"White Rum", "amount":0.05});
Mojito.printIngredients();
That throws:
TypeError: Cannot set property 'ingredients' of undefined
If I change my code into :
this.ingredients = [];
it works but the printIngredients() method prints undefined twice. When I do:
var array = [];
array.push({"a":1, "b":2});
console.log(array[0].a, array[0].b)
everything works as I would expect it to. Can someone clarify what I'm doing wrong and where my thoughts got mixed up?
Change your code to
function cocktail(){
this.ingredients = []; //this doesn't have prototype property
this.printIngredients = function() {
var i;
for (i = 0; i<this.ingredients.length; ++i) {
console.log(this.ingredients[i].fluid);//use the counter variable to get the fluid value at current counter value
console.log(this.ingredients[i].amount);//use the counter variable to get the amount value at current counter value
}
}
}
var Mojito = new cocktail();
console.log(Mojito.ingredients)
Mojito.ingredients.push({"fluid":"White Rum", "amount":0.05});
Mojito.printIngredients();
Alternatively, if you are familiar with class-based languages, you could use modern JavaScript to avoid some of the confusion.
class Cocktail {
constructor() {
this.ingredients = []
}
printIngredients() {
// let is like var, but scoped to blocks instead of functions
// for...of iterates on values instead of keys/indices
for (let ingredient of this.ingredients) {
console.log(ingredient.fluid)
}
}
}
This kind of JavaScript is available from:
Chrome 49
Edge 13
Firefox 44
Node.js 6
Documentation:
Classes
let
for...of
well, first you want to remove printIngredients method out of the constructor function, it will improve performance when it comes to a larger project since you don't have to create different copies every time you instantiate the constructor function, secondly, it is a convention to capitalize the first letter of your constructor. Last but not least, use let and const as they limit the scope to block rather than var that's function scope.
function Cocktail(){
this.ingredients = [];
}
Cocktail.prototype.printIngredients = function() {
// for in ... iterates on keys rather than values
for (let i in this.ingredients) {
console.log(this.ingredients[i].fluid);//use the counter variable to get the fluid value at current counter value
console.log(this.ingredients[i].amount);//use the counter variable to get the amount value at current counter value
}
}
const Mojito = new Cocktail();
console.log(Mojito.ingredients)
Mojito.ingredients.push({"fluid":"White Rum", "amount":0.05});
Mojito.printIngredients();

Counter array in Javascript

I am trying to make two arrays. the unique array can get the elements (no repeats) from the text array, and the counter one can count the frequency of each elements. but something is wrong with the counter one.
var unique_array=new Array();
var counter_array=new Array();
var unique=true;
for (i=0;i<text_array.length;i++){
if (unique_array.length==0){
unique_array.push(text_array[0]);
counter_array.push(1);
}
else if(unique_array.length>0&&unique_array.length<=text_array.length){
for (j=0; j<unique_array.length;j++){
if (text_array[i]==unique_array[j]){
counter_array[j]=counter_array[j]+1;// something wrong with the
alert(counter_array[j]);
var unique=false;
}
}
if (unique==true){
unique_array.push(text_array[i]);
counter_array.push[1];
}
unique=true;
}
You could also simplify the code down using a hashmap and some ES5 higher-order functions:
var text_array = ["a1","a1","a2","a3","a2","a4","a1","a5"];
var counts = {};
text_array.forEach(function(el) {
counts[el] = counts.hasOwnProperty(el) ? counts[el]+1 : 1;
});
var unique_array = Object.keys(counts);
var counter_array=unique_array.map(function(key) { return counts[key]; })
You can do this much more simply using an object. Let the values be the keys of an object, then just increment the count of each property as you go. At the end, you can get an array of the unique keys and their values:
var text_array = ['foo','bar','foo','fum','fum','foo'];
var i = text_array.length;
var obj = {};
while (i--) {
if (obj.hasOwnProperty(text_array[i])) {
obj[text_array[i]]++;
} else {
obj[text_array[i]] = 1;
}
}
console.log('Unique values: ' + Object.keys(obj)); // Unique values: foo,fum,bar
console.log('Value counts: ' + Object.keys(obj).map(function(v){return obj[v]})); // Value counts: 3,2,1
Note that the sorting of counts in the output is purely coincidental.
As Jasvir posted, you can make it pretty concise:
var obj = {};
text_array.forEach(function(v) {
obj.hasOwnProperty(v)? ++obj[v] : obj[v] = 1;
});
But the first example is a bit easier to digest.
I think the approach is what's making it difficult. A hash table / associative array would be much easier to work with.
With a hash table (an object {} in JS), you can store each word in a key and increment the value of the key when you encounter the word again. Then, at the end, just go through the hash table and gather up all the keys which have small values. Those are your unique words.
function get_unique_words(text_array) {
var hash_table, i, unique_words, keys;
hash_table = {};
for(i = 0; i < text_array.length; i++) {
if(hash_table[text_array[i]] === undefined) {
hash_table[text_array[i]] = 1;
} else {
hash_table[text_array[i]]++;
}
}
// go through the hash table and get all the unique words
unique_words = [];
keys = Object.keys(hash_table);
for(i = 0; i < keys.length; i++) {
if(hash_table[keys[i]] === 1) {
unique_words.push(keys[i]);
}
}
return unique_words.sort();
}
console.log(get_unique_words(
['blah', 'blah', 'blah', 'goose', 'duck',
'mountain', 'rock', 'paper', 'rock', 'scissors']
));
Some issues and suggestions :
Don't use var twice for the same variable.
Browsers deal with it ok, but for clarity you should only be declaring your variables once.
Always localize your loop counters - forgetting a var before your i and j will cause them to become global variables.
This is relevant when you have a page with lots of code - all global variables will show up in the debugger's watch list at all times, making it harder to debug your code.)
Use the array literal notation [] instead of the function form Array.
The function form is longer and it's easier to forget the new. It's also easier to read (IMO).
Use more whitespace (it won't bite), such as before and after an equals sign:
var x = 1;
// vs.
var x=1;
It makes the code easier to read and most people don't overdo it.
Indent your code when it's inside a block (e.g. function, if, else, while, for, etc.).
This makes it easier to read the control flow of the code and will help prevent bugs.
Use three equals signs (===) unless you are using loose equality on purpose.
This will help someone looking at your code later (probably yourself) understand better what the test is supposed to be testing.

Categories