We Keep Coding

Unable to Get Output From While Loop in Javascript

I'm working on my final project of the Winter 2017 quarter to demonstrate how to use Regular Expressions in both C# and JavaScript code behind pages. I've got the C# version of my demonstration program done, but the JavaScript version is making me pull what little hair I have left on my head out (no small achievement since I got a fresh buzz cut this morning!). The problem involves not getting any output after applying a Regular Expression in a While loop to get each instance of the expression and printing it out.
On my HTML page I have an input textarea, seven radio buttons, an output textarea, and two buttons underneath (one button is to move the output text to the input area to perform multiple iterations of applying expressions, and the other button to clear all textareas for starting from scratch). Each radio button links to a function that applies a regular expression to the text in the input area. Five of my seven functions work; the sixth is the one I can't figure out, and the seventh is essentially the same but with a slightly different RegEx pattern, so if I fix the sixth function, the seventh function will be a snap.
(I tried to insert/upload a JPG of the front end, but the photo upload doesn't seem to be working. Hopefully you get the drift of what I've set up.)
Here are my problem children from my JS code behind:
// RegEx_Demo_JS.js - code behind for RegEx_Demo_JS
var inputString; // Global variable for the input from the input text box.
var pattern; // Global variable for the regular expression.
var result; // Global variable for the result of applying the regular expression to the user input.
// Initializes a new instance of the StringBuilder class
// and appends the given value if supplied
function StringBuilder()
{
var strings = [];
this.append = function (string)
{
string = verify(string);
if (string.length > 0) strings[strings.length] = string;
}
this.appendLine = function (string)
{
string = verify(string);
if (this.isEmpty())
{
if (string.length > 0) strings[strings.length] = string;
else return;
}
else strings[strings.length] = string.length > 0 ? "\r\n" + string : "\r\n";
}
this.clear = function () { strings = []; };
this.isEmpty = function () { return strings.length == 0; };
this.toString = function () { return strings.join(""); };
var verify = function (string)
{
if (!defined(string)) return "";
if (getType(string) != getType(new String())) return String(string);
return string;
}
var defined = function (el)
{
// Changed per Ryan O'Hara's comment:
return el != null && typeof(el) != "undefined";
}
var getType = function (instance)
{
if (!defined(instance.constructor)) throw Error("Unexpected object type");
var type = String(instance.constructor).match(/function\s+(\w+)/);
return defined(type) ? type[1] : "undefined";
}
}
Within the code of the second radio button (which will be the seventh and last function to complete), I tested the ScriptBuilder with data in a local variable, and it ran successfully and produced output into the output textarea. But I get no output from this next function that invokes a While loop:
function RegEx_Match_TheOnly_AllInstances()
{
inputString = document.getElementById("txtUserInput").value;
pattern = /(\s+the\s+)/ig; // Using an Flag (/i) to select either lowercase or uppercase version. Finds first occurrence either as a standalone word or inside a word.
//result = pattern.exec(inputString); // Finds the first index location
var arrResult; // Array for the results of the search.
var sb = getStringBuilder(); // Variable to hold iterations of the result and the text
while ((arrResult = pattern.exec(inputString)) !==null)
{
sb.appendLine = "Match: " + arrResult[0] ;
}
document.getElementById("txtRegExOutput").value = sb.toString();
/* Original code from C# version:
// string pattern = #"\s+(?i)the\s+"; // Same as above, but using Option construct for case insensitive search.
string pattern = #"(^|\s+)(?i)the(\W|\s+)";
MatchCollection matches = Regex.Matches(userTextInput, pattern);
StringBuilder outputString = new StringBuilder();
foreach (Match match in matches)
{
string outputRegExs = "Match: " + "\"" + match.Value + "\"" + " at index [" + match.Index + ","
+ (match.Index + match.Length) + "]" + "\n";
outputString.Append(outputRegExs);
}
txtRegExOutput.Text = outputString.ToString();
*/
} // End RegEx_Match_The_AllInstances
I left the commented code in to show what I had used in the C# code behind version to illustrate what I'm trying to accomplish.
The test input/string I used for this function is:
Don’t go there. If you want to be the Man, you have to beat The Man.
That should return two hits. Ideally, I want it to show the word that it found and the index where it found the word, but at this point I'd be happy to just get some output showing every instance it found, and then build on that with the index and possibly the lastIndex.
So, is my problem in my While loop, the way I'm applying the StringBuilder, or a combination of the two? I know the StringBuilder code works, at least when not being used in a loop and using some test data from the site I found that code. And the code for simply finding the first instance of "the" as a standalone or inside another word does work and returns output, but that doesn't use a loop.
I've looked through Stack Overflow and several other JavaScript websites for inspiration, but nothing I've tried so far has worked. I appreciate any help anyone can provide! (If you need me to post any other code, please advise and I'll be happy to oblige.)

Deleting part of string from hidden box - javascript

I have one hidden box which contains value like (,1420,1254,1258,124,1235). These values are IDs which are populated based on the description selected by user through Select Box. If user selects any description and removes it from Select Box then corresponding ID should be removed from the Hidden box. I can only use Javascript to do this. I tried using replace method but it is not supported and also my application works only in IE browser.
Could anyone let me know how to get this done?
TIA

Without seeing your code, this is the most we can help you with
function removeId(hiddenBox,id){
var idList = hiddenBox.innerHTML;
idList = idList.customReplace(','+id,'');
hiddenBox.innerHTML = idList;
}
And since you said the replace method is not working for some reason (which is weird), here is a custom replace method
I'm hoping the indexOf(), length and substring() methods are still working
String.prototype.customReplace = function(from,to){
var string = String(this);
var newString = "";
var startIndex = string.indexOf(from);
if(startIndex == -1) return string;
var endIndex = startIndex + from.length;
newString = string.substring(0,startIndex);
newString += to;
newString += string.substring(endIndex,string.length);
return newString;
}

Searching for most performant way for string replacing with javascript

I'm programming my own autocomplete textbox control using C# and javascript on clientside. On client side i want to replace the characters in string which matching the characters the user was searching for to highlight it. For example if the user was searching for the characters 'bue' i want to replace this letters in the word 'marbuel' like so:
mar<span style="color:#81BEF7;font-weight:bold">bue</span>l
in order to give the matching part another color. This works pretty fine if i have 100-200 items in my autocomplete, but when it comes to 500 or more, it takes too mutch time.
The following code shows my method which does the logic for this:
HighlightTextPart: function (text, part) {
var currentPartIndex = 0;
var partLength = part.length;
var finalString = '';
var highlightPart = '';
var bFoundPart = false;
var bFoundPartHandled = false;
var charToAdd;
for (var i = 0; i < text.length; i++) {
var myChar = text[i];
charToAdd = null;
if (!bFoundPart) {
var myCharLower = myChar.toLowerCase();
var charToCompare = part[currentPartIndex].toLowerCase();
if (charToCompare == myCharLower) {
highlightPart += myChar;
if (currentPartIndex == partLength - 1)
bFoundPart = true;
currentPartIndex++;
}
else {
currentPartIndex = 0;
highlightPart = '';
charToAdd = myChar;
}
}
else
charToAdd = myChar;
if (bFoundPart && !bFoundPartHandled) {
finalString += '<span style="color:#81BEF7;font-weight:bold">' + highlightPart + '</span>';
bFoundPartHandled = true;
}
if (charToAdd != null)
finalString += charToAdd;
}
return finalString;
},
This method only highlight the first occurence of the matching part.
I use it as follows. Once the request is coming back from server i build an html UL list with the matching items by looping over each item and in each loop i call this method in order to highlight the matching part.
As i told for up to 100 items it woks pretty nice but it is too mutch for 500 or more.
Is there any way to make it faster? Maybe by using regex or some other technique?
I also thought about using "setTimeOut" to do it in a extra function or maybe do it only for the items, which currently are visible, because only a couple of items are visible while for the others you have to scroll.

Try limiting visible list size, so you are only showing 100 items at maximum for example. From a usability standpoint, perhaps even go down to only 20 items, so it would be even faster than that. Also consider using classes - see if it improves performance. So instead of
mar<span style="color:#81BEF7;font-weight:bold">bue</span>l
You will have this:
mar<span class="highlight">bue</span>l

String replacement in JavaScript is pretty easy with String.replace():
function linkify(s, part)
{
return s.replace(part, function(m) {
return '<span style="color:#81BEF7;font-weight:bold">' + htmlspecialchars(m) + '</span>';
});
}
function htmlspecialchars(txt)
{
return txt.replace('<', '<')
.replace('>', '>')
.replace('"', '"')
.replace('&', '&');
}
console.log(linkify('marbuel', 'bue'));

I fixed this problem by using regex instead of my method posted previous. I replace the string now with the following code:
return text.replace(new RegExp('(' + part + ')', 'gi'), "<span>$1</span>");
This is pretty fast. Much faster as the code above. 500 items in the autocomplete seems to be no problem. But can anybody explain, why this is so mutch faster as my method or doing it with string.replace without regex? I have no idea.
Thx!

My javascript works in every browser but IE8

By every browser, I mean Safari, Firefox, Chrome, and IE9.
Here is the error I'm getting in IE8's console:
'data.cities[...].country' is null or not an object
Line 374, which is below (var country = k.data.cities[i].country;):
downloadUrl(url, function(data) {
var k = eval("(" + data.responseText + ")");
var klength = k.data.cities.length;
var countries = [];
for(i=0; i < klength; i++) {
var country = k.data.cities[i].country;
countries.push(country);
}
countries = $.unique(countries);
var countryLength = countries.length;
for(i=0; i < countryLength; i++) {
$('.ribbon').append('' + countries[i] + '');
}
});
Why would IE8 be the only browser having a problem with this line? I know the data being fed is not null, as the same data is used to place objects on a map and they display just fine.

I suspect that the eval() function doesn't return what you expect.
You might want to try using JSON.parse instead.
You can find a parser there for browsers that don't have native support for JSON.

The problem is most probably that data.responseText might have a trailing comma somewhere.
[
"A", "B", "C",
]
This does not work for Internet Explorer and is also not valid JSON. All other browsers cope with the trailing comma.
Fix: Change your AJAX end point to omit all trailing commas.
Even better fix: Use JSON.parse which will bomb for non-valid JSON, so that all browser behave the same by failing.

Fastest way to search string in javascript

I have a hidden field on my page that stores space separated list of emails.
I can have maximum 500 emails in that field.
What will be the fastest way to search if a given email already exists in that list?
I need to search multiple emails in a loop
use RegEx to find a match
use indexOf()
convert the list to a
javascript dictionary and then
search
If this is an exact duplicate, please let me know the other question.
Thanks
EDIT:
Thanks everyone for your valuable comments and answers.
Basically my user has a list of emails(0-500) in db.
User is presented with his own contact list.
User can then choose one\more emails from his contact list to add to the list.
I want to ensure at client side that he is not adding duplicate emails.
Whole operation is driven by ajax, so jsvascript is required.

The answer is: It depends.
It depends on what you actually want to measure.
It depends on the relationship between how many you're searching for vs. how many you're searching.
It depends on the JavaScript implementation. Different implementations usually have radically different performance characteristics. This is one of the many reasons why the rule "Don't optimize prematurely" applies especially to cross-implementation JavaScript.
...but provided you're looking for a lot fewer than you have in total, it's probably String#indexOf unless you can create the dictionary once and reuse it (not just this one loop of looking for X entries, but every loop looking for X entries, which I tend to doubt is your use-case), in which case that's hands-down faster to build the 500-key dictionary and use that.
I put together a test case on jsperf comparing the results of looking for five strings buried in a string containing 500 space-delimited, unique entries. Note that that jsperf page compares some apples and oranges (cases where we can ignore setup and what kind of setup we're ignoring), but jsperf was being a pain about splitting it and I decided to leave that as an exercise for the reader.
In my tests of what I actually think you're doing, Chrome, Firefox, IE6, IE7 and IE9 did String#indexOf fastest. Opera did RegExp alternation fastest. (Note that IE6 and IE7 don't have Array#indexOf; the others do.) If you can ignore dictionary setup time, then using a dictionary is the hands-down winner.
Here's the prep code:
// ==== Main Setup
var toFind = ["aaaaa100#zzzzz", "aaaaa200#zzzzz", "aaaaa300#zzzzz", "aaaaa400#zzzzz", "aaaaa500#zzzzz"];
var theString = (function() {
var m, n;
m = [];
for (n = 1; n <= 500; ++n) {
m.push("aaaaa" + n + "#zzzzz");
}
return m.join(" ");
})();
// ==== String#indexOf (and RegExp) setup for when we can ignore setup
var preppedString = " " + theString + " ";
// ==== RegExp setup for test case ignoring RegExp setup time
var theRegExp = new RegExp(" (?:" + toFind.join("|") + ") ", "g");
// ==== Dictionary setup for test case ignoring Dictionary setup time
var theDictionary = (function() {
var dict = {};
var index;
var values = theString.split(" ");
for (index = 0; index < values.length; ++index) {
dict[values[index]] = true;
}
return dict;
})();
// ==== Array setup time for test cases where we ignore array setup time
var theArray = theString.split(" ");
The String#indexOf test:
var index;
for (index = 0; index < toFind.length; ++index) {
if (theString.indexOf(toFind[index]) < 0) {
throw "Error";
}
}
The String#indexOf (ignore setup) test, in which we ignore the (small) overhead of putting spaces at either end of the big string:
var index;
for (index = 0; index < toFind.length; ++index) {
if (preppedString.indexOf(toFind[index]) < 0) {
throw "Error";
}
}
The RegExp alternation test:
// Note: In real life, you'd have to escape the values from toFind
// to make sure they didn't have special regexp chars in them
var regexp = new RegExp(" (?:" + toFind.join("|") + ") ", "g");
var match, counter = 0;
var str = " " + theString + " ";
for (match = regexp.exec(str); match; match = regexp.exec(str)) {
++counter;
}
if (counter != 5) {
throw "Error";
}
The RegExp alternation (ignore setup) test, where we ignore the time it takes to set up the RegExp object and putting spaces at either end of the big string (I don't think this applies to your situation, the addresses you're looking for would be static):
var match, counter = 0;
for (match = theRegExp.exec(preppedString); match; match = theRegExp.exec(preppedString)) {
++counter;
}
if (counter != 5) {
throw "Error";
}
The Dictionary test:
var dict = {};
var index;
var values = theString.split(" ");
for (index = 0; index < values.length; ++index) {
dict[values[index]] = true;
}
for (index = 0; index < toFind.length; ++index) {
if (!(toFind[index] in dict)) {
throw "Error";
}
}
The Dictionary (ignore setup) test, where we don't worry about the setup time for the dictionary; note that this is different than the RegExp alternation (ignore setup) test because it assumes the overall list is invariant:
var index;
for (index = 0; index < toFind.length; ++index) {
if (!(toFind[index] in theDictionary)) {
throw "Error";
}
}
The Array#indexOf test (note that some very old implementations of JavaScript may not have Array#indexOf):
var values = theString.split(" ");
var index;
for (index = 0; index < toFind.length; ++index) {
if (values.indexOf(toFind[index]) < 0) {
throw "Error";
}
}
The Array#indexOf (ignore setup) test, which like Dictionary (ignore setup) assumes the overall list is invariant:
var index;
for (index = 0; index < toFind.length; ++index) {
if (theArray.indexOf(toFind[index]) < 0) {
throw "Error";
}
}

Instead of looking for the fastest solution, you first need to make sure that you’re actually having a correct solution. Because there are four cases an e-mail address can appear and a naive search can fail:
Alone: user#example.com
At the begin: user#example.com ...
At the end: ... user#example.com
In between: ... user#example.com ...
Now let’s analyze each variant:
To allow arbitrary input, you will need to escape the input properly. You can use the following method to do so:
RegExp.quote = function(str) {
return str.toString().replace(/(?=[.?*+^$[\]\\(){}-])/g, "\\");
};
To match all four cases, you can use the following pattern:
/(?:^|\ )user#example\.com(?![^\ ])/
Thus:
var inList = new RegExp("(?:^| )" + RegExp.quote(needle) + "(?![^ ])").test(haystack);
Using indexOf is a little more complex as you need to check the boundaries manually:
var pos = haystack.indexOf(needle);
if (pos != -1 && (pos != 0 && haystack.charAt(pos-1) !== " " || haystack.length < (pos+needle.length) && haystack.charAt(pos+needle.length) !== " ")) {
pos = -1;
}
var inList = pos != -1;
This one is rather quite simple:
var dict = {};
haystack.match(/[^\ ]+/g).map(function(match) { dict[match] = true; });
var inList = dict.hasOwnProperty(haystack);
Now to test what variant is the fastest, you can do that at jsPerf.

indexOf() is most probably the fastest just keep in mind you need to search for two possible cases:
var existingEmails = "email1, email2, ...";
var newEmail = "somethingHere#email.com";
var exists = (existingEmails.indexOf(newEmail + " ") >= 0) || (existingEmails.indexOf(" " + newEmail ) > 0);

You're asking a question with too many unstated variables for us to answer. For example, how many times do you expect to perform this search? only once? A hundred times? Is this a fixed list of emails, or does it change every time? Are you loading the emails with the page, or by AJAX?
IF you are performing more than one search, or the emails are loaded with the page, then you are probably best off creating a dictionary of the names, and using the Javascript in operator.
If you get the string from some off-page source, and you only search it once, then indexOf may well be better.
In all cases, if you really care about the speed, you're best off making a test.
But then I'd ask "Why do you care about the speed?" This is a web page, where loading the page happens at network speeds; the search happens at more or less local-processor speed. It's very unlikely that this one search will make a perceptible difference in the behavior of the page.

Here is a little explanation:
Performing a dictionary lookup is relatively complicated - very fast compared with (say) a linear lookup by key when there are lots of keys, but much more complicated than a straight array lookup. It has to calculate the hash of the key, then work out which bucket that should be in, possibly deal with duplicate hashes (or duplicate buckets) and then check for equality.
As always, choose the right data structure for the job - and if you really can get away with just indexing into an array (or List) then yes, that will be blindingly fast.
The above has been taken from one of the blog posts of #Jon Skeet.

I know this is an old question, but here goes an answer for those who might need in the future.
I made some tests and the indexOf() method is impossibly fast!
Tested the case on Opera 12.16 and it took 216µs to search and possibly find something.
Here is the code used:
console.time('a');
var a=((Math.random()*1e8)>>0).toString(16);
for(var i=0;i<1000;++i)a=a+' '+((Math.random()*1e8)>>0).toString(16)+((Math.random()*1e8)>>0).toString(16)+((Math.random()*1e8)>>0).toString(16)+((Math.random()*1e8)>>0).toString(16);
console.timeEnd('a');
console.time('b');
var b=(' '+a).indexOf(((Math.random()*1e8)>>0).toString(16));
console.timeEnd('b');
console.log([a,b]);
In the console you will see a huge output.
The timer 'a' counts the time taken to make the "garbage", and the timer 'b' is the time to search for the string.
Just adding 2 spaces, one before and one after, on the email list and adding 1 space before and after the email, you are set to go.
I use it to search for a class in an element without jQuery and it works pretty fast and fine.