Situation
I'm currently writing a javascript widget that displays a random quote into a html element. the quotes are stored in a javascript array as well as how many times they've been displayed into the html element. A quote to be displayed cannot be the same quote as was previously displayed. Furthermore the chance for a quote to be selected is based on it's previous occurences in the html element. ( less occurrences should result in a higher chance compared to the other quotes to be selected for display.
Current solution
I've currently made it work ( with my severely lacking javascript knowledge ) by using a lot of looping through various arrays. while this currently works ( !! ) I find this solution rather expensive for what I want to achieve.
What I'm looking for
Alternative methods of removing an array element from an array, currently looping through the entire array to find the element I want removed and copy all other elements into a new array
Alternative method of calculating and selecting a element from an array based on it's occurence
Anything else you notice I should / could do different while still enforcing the stated business rules under Situation
The Code
var quoteElement = $("div#Quotes > q"),
quotes = [[" AAAAAAAAAAAA ", 1],
[" BBBBBBBBBBBB ", 1],
[" CCCCCCCCCCCC ", 1],
[" DDDDDDDDDDDD ", 1]],
fadeTimer = 600,
displayNewQuote = function () {
var currentQuote = quoteElement.text();
var eligibleQuotes = new Array();
var exclusionFound = false;
for (var i = 0; i < quotes.length; i++) {
var iteratedQuote = quotes[i];
if (exclusionFound === false) {
if (currentQuote == iteratedQuote[0].toString())
exclusionFound = true;
else
eligibleQuotes.push(iteratedQuote);
} else
eligibleQuotes.push(iteratedQuote);
}
eligibleQuotes.sort( function (current, next) {
return current[1] - next[1];
} );
var calculatePoint = eligibleQuotes[0][1];
var occurenceRelation = new Array();
var relationSum = 0;
for (var i = 0; i < eligibleQuotes.length; i++) {
if (i == 0)
occurenceRelation[i] = 1 / ((calculatePoint / calculatePoint) + (calculatePoint / eligibleQuotes[i+1][1]));
else
occurenceRelation[i] = occurenceRelation[0] * (calculatePoint / eligibleQuotes[i][1]);
relationSum = relationSum + (occurenceRelation[i] * 100);
}
var generatedNumber = Math.floor(relationSum * Math.random());
var newQuote;
for (var i = 0; i < occurenceRelation.length; i++) {
if (occurenceRelation[i] <= generatedNumber) {
newQuote = eligibleQuotes[i][0].toString();
i = occurenceRelation.length;
}
}
for (var i = 0; i < quotes.length; i++) {
var iteratedQuote = quotes[i][0].toString();
if (iteratedQuote == newQuote) {
quotes[i][1]++;
i = quotes.length;
}
}
quoteElement.stop(true, true)
.fadeOut(fadeTimer);
setTimeout( function () {
quoteElement.html(newQuote)
.fadeIn(fadeTimer);
}, fadeTimer);
}
if (quotes.length > 1)
setInterval(displayNewQuote, 10000);
Alternatives considered
Always chose the array element with the lowest occurence.
Decided against this as this would / could possibly reveal a too obvious pattern in the animation
combine several for loops to reduce the workload
Decided against this as this would make the code to esoteric, I'd probably wouldn't understand the code anymore next week
jsFiddle reference
http://jsfiddle.net/P5rk3/
Update
Rewrote my function with the techniques mentioned, while I fear that these techniques still loop through the entire array to find it's requirements, at least my code looks cleaner : )
References used after reading the answers here:
http://www.tutorialspoint.com/javascript/array_map.htm
http://www.tutorialspoint.com/javascript/array_filter.htm
http://api.jquery.com/jQuery.each/
I suggest array functions that are mostly supported (and easily added if not):
[].splice(index, howManyToDelete); // you can alternatively add extra parameters to slot into the place of deletion
[].indexOf(elementToSearchFor);
[].filter(function(){});
Other useful functions include forEach and map.
I agree that combining all the work into one giant loop is ugly (and not always possible), and you gain little by doing it, so readability is definitely the winner. Although you shouldn't need too many loops with these array functions.
The answer that you want:
Create an integer array that stores the number of uses of every quote. Also, a global variable Tot with the total number of quotes already used (i.e., the sum of that integer array). Find also Mean, as Tot / number of quotes.
Chose a random number between 0 and Tot - 1.
For each quote, add Mean * 2 - the number of uses(*1). When you get that that value has exceeded the random number generated, select that quote.
In case that quote is the one currently displayed, either select the next or the previous quote or just repeat the process.
The real answer:
Use a random quote, at the very maximum repeat if the quote is duplicated. The data usages are going to be lost when the user reloads/leaves the page. And, no matter how cleverly have you chosen them, most users do not care.
(*1) Check for limits, i.e. that the first or last quota will be eligible with this formula.
Alternative methods of removing an array element from an array
With ES5's Array.filter() method:
Array.prototype.without = function(v) {
return this.filter(function(x) {
return v !== x;
});
};
given an array a, a.without(v) will return a copy of a without the element v in it.
less occurrences should result in a higher chance compared to the other quotes to be selected for display
You shouldn't mess with chance - as my mathematician other-half says, "chance doesn't have a memory".
What you're suggesting is akin to the idea that numbers in the lottery that haven't come up yet must be "overdue" and therefore more likely to appear. It simply isn't true.
You can write functions that explicitly define what you're trying to do with the loop.
Your first loop is a filter.
Your second loop is a map + some side effect.
I don't know about the other loops, they're weird :P
A filter is something like:
function filter(array, condition) {
var i = 0, new_array = [];
for (; i < array.length; i += 1) {
if (condition(array[i], i)) {
new_array.push(array[i]);
}
}
return new_array;
}
var numbers = [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9];
var even_numbers = filter(numbers, function (number, index) {
return number % 2 === 0;
});
alert(even_numbers); // [2,4,6,8]
You can't avoid the loop, but you can add more semantics to the code by making a function that explains what you're doing.
If, for some reason, you are not comfortable with splice or filter methods, there is a nice (outdated, but still working) method by John Resig: http://ejohn.org/blog/javascript-array-remove/
Related
I want to build an if statement in which the if criteria is based on an equality test of whether a variable equals any of several values. However, I do not want to hardcode the test values, but to pass an array of values that had been randomly subset earlier.
First, I get the set of randomized values by subsetting/sampling 5 values out of an array of 15 values. Basically, I'm using this excellent solution.
function getRandomSubarray(arr, size) {
var shuffled = arr.slice(0), i = arr.length, temp, index;
while (i--) {
index = Math.floor((i + 1) * Math.random());
temp = shuffled[index];
shuffled[index] = shuffled[i];
shuffled[i] = temp;
}
return shuffled.slice(0, size);
}
var x = [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15];
var fiveRandomMembers = getRandomSubarray(x, 5);
Then, I want to pass fiveRandomMembers to test whether a variable is equal to any of the values in fiveRandomMembers's array. Then do something. To this end, I want to use this solution.
var L = function()
{
var obj = {};
for(var i=0; i<arguments.length; i++)
obj[arguments[i]] = null;
return obj;
};
if(foo in L(fiveRandomMembers)) {
/// do something
};
Unfortunately, this doesn't work for me. I must admit that the implementation of this code is within a Qualtrics survey, so the problem might be nuanced to the Qualtrics platform, and that's the reason it isn't working for me. I'm newbie to JavaScript so I apologize if this is a trivial question. But I believe that my code is problematic even in plain JavaScript (that is, regardless of Qualtrics), and I want to figure out why.
UPDATE 2020-05-24
I've been digging into this more deeply, and I have some insights. This looks more like a qualtrics problem rather than plain JS issue. However, the underlying problem might still have to do with some JS mechanism, and that's why I bother to update it here -- maybe someone will know what's causing this behavior.
To recap -- I want to condition an action based on whether a given variable's content matches either of the values in an array. I've tried using both includes and indexOf, but either method fails. The problem boils down to the functions not doing an exact match. For example, if I have an array of 5 numbers such as 8, 9, 12, 13, 14, and I want to test whether 4 exists in the array, then an exact match should return FALSE. However, both indexOf and contains return TRUE because 14 has 4 in it. This is not an exact matching then. Furthermore, I've tried to investigate what is the position indexOf would return for such a false-positive match. Typically, it would return a position that is even larger than the total length of the array, making no sense whatsoever. Here's an example from my Qualtrics survey, demonstrating the problem:
The code giving this is comprised of two qualtrics questions:
(-) First piece
Qualtrics.SurveyEngine.addOnReady(function()
{
/*Place your JavaScript here to run when the page is fully displayed*/
function getRandomSubarray(arr, size) {
var shuffled = arr.slice(0), i = arr.length, temp, index;
while (i--) {
index = Math.floor((i + 1) * Math.random());
temp = shuffled[index];
shuffled[index] = shuffled[i];
shuffled[i] = temp;
}
return shuffled.slice(0, size);
}
var x = [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15];
var fiveRandomMembers = getRandomSubarray(x, 5);
if (Array.isArray(fiveRandomMembers)) Qualtrics.SurveyEngine.setEmbeddedData('is_array', "TRUE");
Qualtrics.SurveyEngine.setEmbeddedData('length', fiveRandomMembers.length);
Qualtrics.SurveyEngine.setEmbeddedData('five_sampled_numbers', fiveRandomMembers);
});
(-) Second piece
Qualtrics.SurveyEngine.addOnReady(function()
{
jQuery("#"+this.questionId).find('.QuestionText:first').css("padding-bottom", "0px");
var currentLoopNum = "${lm://CurrentLoopNumber}";
// var currentLoopNum = parseInt(currentLoopNum, 10); // tried converting to numeric but it doesn't solve the problem
var fiveSampledNumbers = "${e://Field/five_sampled_numbers}";
if (fiveSampledNumbers.includes(currentLoopNum)) {
Qualtrics.SurveyEngine.setEmbeddedData('does_loop_number_appear', "Yes");
} else {
Qualtrics.SurveyEngine.setEmbeddedData('does_loop_number_appear', "No");
}
Qualtrics.SurveyEngine.setEmbeddedData('index_of', fiveSampledNumbers.indexOf(currentLoopNum));
});
Here is a link to the Qualtrics survey, demonstrating the problem, in case it's helpful for troubleshooting: link
However, when testing the same code outside of Qualtrics, the problem doesn't replicate.
Does someone have a clue or even a hypothesis what could be the problem with the matching? Even if you're not necessarily familiar with Qualtrics...
I've never worked with Qualtrics before, but to me it is clear that the line
var fiveSampledNumbers = "${e://Field/five_sampled_numbers}";
will assign a string value to fiveSampledNumbers, not an array value.
Indeed, if you attempt to run the checks you are making on a string rather than an array, you get the unexpected results you saw above, because you are doing string operations rather than array operations:
var fiveSampledNumbers = "6,4,10,11,15";
console.log(fiveSampledNumbers.includes(5)); // logs true (string ends with the character "5")
console.log(fiveSampledNumbers.indexOf(5)); // logs 11 (index of the character "5")
To get around this, you will have to split the string by commas and parse each number within it:
var fiveSampledNumbers = "6,4,10,11,15";
fiveSampledNumbers = fiveSampledNumbers.split(",").map(function (n) { return parseInt(n, 10); });
console.log(fiveSampledNumbers.includes(5)); // logs false
console.log(fiveSampledNumbers.indexOf(5)); // logs -1
I have seen several answers on Stackoverflow but none have helped me. I have a huge array of nearly 100,000 words, of which I am trying to remove all words that contain a number. I am using the following to do that:
for(var i = 0; i < words.length; i++){
if (hasNumbers(words[i]) {
words.splice(i, 1);
}
function hasNumbers(t)
{ return /\d/.test(t); }
It seems to work, but not all the time because I am still getting words that contain numbers. What can I change to make this remove all words that contain any number at all?
(I am using p5.js with my js)
That is because when you delete a word at index i, the next word will have index i, yet you still increase i, thereby skipping a word which you never inspect.
To solve this you can go backwards through your array:
for(var i = words.length - 1; i >= 0; i--){
// etc.
Here is a shorter way to remove words with digits:
words = words.filter(a => !hasNumbers(a));
Finally, you really should call your second function hasDigits instead of hasNumbers. The words "digit" and "number" have a slightly different meaning.
Here is a snippet, using ES6 syntax, that defines the opposite function hasNoDigits and applies it to some sample data:
let words = ['abcd', 'ab0d', '4444', '-)#', '&9ยต*'];
let hasNoDigits = s => /^\D*$/.test(s);
console.log(words.filter(hasNoDigits));
words = words.filter(a => !hasNumbers(a));
I had started writing this and then trincot answered. His answer is correct, though with the popular and widespread usage of ES5 array functions, I feel like you could simplify this down quite a bit.
window.addEventListener('load', function() {
var data = [
'w3.org',
'google.com',
'00011118.com'
]; //This is supposed to be your data, I didn't have it so I made it up.
var no_nums = data.filter(function(item) {
//Tests each string against the regex, inverts the value (false becomes true, true becomes false)
return !/\d/.test(item);
});
var results = document.getElementById('results');
no_nums.forEach(function(item) {
results.innerHTML += item + '<br />';
//Loops through each of our new array to add the item so we can see it.
});
});
<div id="results">
</div>
I'm working on an Extendscript tool for Adobe After Effects, and I'm trying to figure out one thing. Extendscript is just Javascript with some Adobe fluff added on top, but pretty much anything Javascript that isn't browser-specific works.
I have a script I've been using/developing for some time now which greatly simplifies importing thousands of images in image sequences. Everything is working great but there's one specific area that runs really slowly when you start getting into thousands of images and I'm trying to figure out how to speed it up.
What I am trying to optimize is going through an array of potentially thousands of image files, and concatenating it down to just the first image in the sequence. For example my array might be: [img.001.png, img.002.png, img.003.png, img.004.png, img.005.png] and what I want to do is remove every instance of "img.###.png" except for the first one. So after my function I would have just: [img.001.png].
Here's how I do it right now:
1) I take array item A, regex out the number sequence
2) then array item B, regex out the number sequence
3) and compare the two to see if they are identical. If they are I splice out item B
This works 100% of the time which is awesome, but is quite slow when you get above a thousand or two images... What I'm trying to do is find a way to do this "pruning" step more quickly. A friend of mine told me regex is pretty slow so maybe I need to do it without regex? I also found several native JavaScript array methods that might help such as forEach() every() and filter() but I don't see how these are going to be faster because I still need to do 2 regex evaluations, and I still need to compare the items to each other.
Any help would be immensely appreciated!
Spencer
Here's a snippet of my existing code:
currentFolder = new Folder ("//12.34.5.67/my folder on the network/")
var folderChildren = currentFolder.getFiles().sort();
var searcher = new RegExp("\\d{3,5}[.]");
for (var i = 0; i < folderChildren.length; i++) {
// Go through the array and strip out all elements that are the same once their numbers have been removed with a regex
if (i > 0) {
currentResult = searcher.exec(folderChildren[i].name); //check if a sequence
if (currentResult) { // it is a sequence
// first parse out the comparison strings - current item and item before
var testNameBefore = folderChildren[i-1].name;
//if we have a sequence before our current item, we need to delete the numbers.
var beforeNum = searcher.exec(testNameBefore);
if (beforeNum) {
testNameBefore = testNameBefore.substring(0, testNameBefore.length-8);
}
var testNameCurrent = folderChildren[i].name;
testNameCurrent = folderChildren[i].name.substring(0, testNameCurrent.length-8);
//compare to the element before it and delete if the same!!
if (testNameBefore == testNameCurrent) {
folderChildren.splice(i, 1);
i--;
}
}
}
}
You don't have a code snippet to compare, but this runs in just a few milliseconds.
var files = getFiles(),
cleanedFiles = getDesequencedArray(files);
console.log(`Parsing ${files.length} files.`);
console.log(`Found ${cleanedFiles.length} unique sequences:`);
console.log(cleanedFiles);
function getDesequencedArray(files) {
return files.reduce(
function(memo, file) {
var sequence = file.match(/(.*)\.?\d{3,5}(.*)/);
if (sequence) {
if (!memo.found[sequence[1] + sequence[2]]) {
memo.found[sequence[1] + sequence[2]] = 1;
memo.files.push(file);
}
} else {
//Did you want the other files included too?
//memo.files.push(file);
}
return memo;
}, {
found: {},
files: []
}
).files;
}
function getFiles() {
var files = [
"img1.001.jpg",
"img1.002.jpg",
"img1.001.png",
"img1.002.png",
"img1.003.png",
"img1.004.png",
"img2.011.jpg",
"img2.012.jpg",
"img2.013.jpg",
"img2.014.jpg",
"img300001.png",
"img300002.png",
"img300003.png",
"img300004.png",
"img300002.100.png",
"img300002.200.png",
"readme.md",
"index.html"
];
// Adding a bunch of records
for (let x = 0; x < 100; x++)
for (
let i = 1;
i <= 1000;
files.push(`img-${x}.` + ("00" + i++).substr(-3) + '.png')
);
return files;
}
I understand how to go about tasks using loops, recursion is kind of a mystery to me, but from what I understand in certain cases it can save a ton of time if looping through a lot of data.
I created the following function to loop through a large(ish) data set.
var quotes = require('./quotes.js');
//Pulls in the exported function from quotes.js
var exportedQuotes = quotes.allQuotes();
var allAuthors = exportedQuotes.author;
//Create an empty key value object, we use these to coerce unique values to an array
var uniqs = {};
//I create this object to hold all the authors and their quotes
var fullQuote = {};
//Create an object with only unique authors
for(var i = 0; i < allAuthors.length ; i++){
fullQuote[allAuthors[i]] = null;
}
//Coerce unique authors from javascript object into an array
var uniqAuthors = Object.keys(uniqs);
var quoteCount = exportedQuotes.author.length;
var iterativeSolution = function(){
for(var i = 0; i < Object.keys(fullQuote).length; i++){
for(var j = 0; j < exportedQuotes.author.length; j++){
//If the author in the unique list is equal to the author in the duplicate list
if(Object.keys(fullQuote)[i] == exportedQuotes.author[j]){
//if an author has not had a quote attributed to its name
if(fullQuote[exportedQuotes.author[j]] == null){
//assign the author an array with the current quote at the 0 index
fullQuote[exportedQuotes.author[j]] = [exportedQuotes.quote[j]]
} else {
//if an author already has a quote assigned to its name then just add the current quote to the authors quote list
fullQuote[exportedQuotes.author[j]].push(exportedQuotes.quote[j])
}
}
}
}
}
I don't currently have the skills to do analyze this, but, I'm wondering if there is a case for recursion to save the time it takes to get through all the loops. And if there is a case for recursion what does it look like for nested loops in javascript, specifically when creating key value objects recursively?
There may be a slight misunderstanding about what recursion is: recursion does not save time. It's just a different way of doing the same traversal. It generally a little easier to read, and depending on the problem, will map to certain algorithms better. However, one of the first things we do when we need to start optimizing code for speed is to remove recursion, turning them back into loops, and then even "unrolling" loops, making code much uglier, but fast, in the process. Recursion vs plain loops is almost always a matter of taste. One looks nicer, but that's hardly the only quality we should judge code on.
And also: just because it sounds like I'm advocating against using it, doesn't mean you shouldn't just try it: take that code, put it in a new file, rewrite that file so that it uses recursion. Doing so lets you compare your code. Which one is faster? Which is easier to read? Now you know something about how (your) code behaves, and you'll have learned something valuable.
Also don't sell yourself short: if you wrote this code, you know how it works, so you know how to analyze it enough to rewrite it.
Algorithms makes code fast or slow, not recursion. Some quite fast algorithms can use recursion, but that's a whole different story. Many algorithms can be written as both with recursion, and without recursion.
However, your code has a big problem. Notice how many times you call this code?
Object.keys(fullQuote)
You are re-computing the value of that many many times in your code. Don't do that. Just call it once and store in a variable, like the following:
var uniqAuthors = Object.keys(uniqs);
var uniqFullQuote = Object.keys(fullQuote);
var quoteCount = exportedQuotes.author.length;
//Loop through all quotes and assign all quotes to a unique author::Each author has many quotes
for(var i = 0; i < uniqFullQuote.length; i++){
for(var j = 0; j < exportedQuotes.author.length; j++){
//If the author in the unique list is equal to the author in the duplicate list
if(uniqFullQuote[i] == exportedQuotes.author[j]){
//if an author has not had a quote attributed to its name
if(fullQuote[exportedQuotes.author[j]] == null){
//assign the author an array with the current quote at the 0 index
fullQuote[exportedQuotes.author[j]] = [exportedQuotes.quote[j]]
} else {
//if an author already has a quote assigned to its name then just add the current quote to the authors quote list
fullQuote[exportedQuotes.author[j]].push(exportedQuotes.quote[j])
}
}
}
}
You don't have to iterate Object.keys(fullQuote).
var quotes = require('./quotes.js'),
exportedQuotes = quotes.allQuotes(),
allAuthors = exportedQuotes.author,
fullQuote = Object.create(null);
for(var i=0; i < allAuthors.length; ++i)
(fullQuote[allAuthors[i]] = fullQuote[allAuthors[i]] || [])
.push(exportedQuotes.quote[i])
I don't recommend recursion. It won't improve the asymptotic cost, and in JS calling functions is a bit expensive.
I got really curious and created a recursive solution just to see how it works. Then timed it, my iterative solution took 53 seconds to run, while my recursive solution took 1 millisecond to run. The iterative approach can obviously be tweaked based on the answers provided below, to run faster, but a recursive approach forced me to think in a "leaner" manner when creating my function.
var exportedQuotes = quotes.allQuotes();
var allAuthors = exportedQuotes.author;
var n = allAuthors.length
var fullQuote = {};
var recursiveSolution = function(arrayLength) {
//base case
if(arrayLength <= 1){
if(fullQuote[exportedQuotes.author[0]] == null){
fullQuote[exportedQuotes.author[0]] = [exportedQuotes.quote[0]];
}else{
fullQuote[exportedQuotes.author[0]].push(exportedQuotes.quote[0])
}
return;
};
//recursive step
if(fullQuote[exportedQuotes.author[arrayLength]] == null){
fullQuote[exportedQuotes.author[arrayLength]] = [exportedQuotes.quote[arrayLength]];
}else{
fullQuote[exportedQuotes.author[arrayLength]].push(exportedQuotes.quote[arrayLength])
}
newLength = arrayLength - 1;
return recursiveSolution(newLength);
}
////////Timing functions
var timeIteration = function(){
console.time(iterativeSolution);
iterativeSolution(); // run whatever needs to be timed in between the statements
return console.timeEnd(iterativeSolution);
}
var timeRecursive = function(){
console.time(recursiveSolution(n));
recursiveSolution(n); // run whatever needs to be timed in between the statements
return console.timeEnd(recursiveSolution(n));
}
I have a big question.
I have many Strings in my Programm and want to check these Strings on there values.
I wrote a Loop for it, but insted of the Definition of an String he is creating a new value. It's basicly really difficult to discribe, also because i am basicly German.
But i can give you my current code, so maybee you will see what I mean:
{
var Loch1G = $('#m1-Rundenanalyse-Datum').val(); //In the strings just the number is changing
var Loch2G = $('#m1-Rundenanalyse-Turnier').val();
x=1
while (x <= 2) {
if ("Loch" + x + "G" == ""){ //Next String is genrated (x=x+1)
alert("Eingabe war leer");
}
x=x+1
}
}
How can I solve this?
I'd suggest using an array to store the values you want to check:
var lochs = [];
lochs.push($('#m1-Rundenanalyse-Datum').val());
lochs.push($('#m1-Rundenanalyse-Turnier').val());
for (var i = 0, len = lochs.length; i < len; i++){
if (lochs[i] == ''){
alert("Eingabe war leer");
}
}
JS Fiddle demos: passes (no alert), fails (alert)
This suggestion is based on my presumption that you're trying to create the names of the vars you want to check, which won't work, whereas this approach lets you store all values (however many) in the same array and then iterate over that array to find any values that are equal to an empty string.
If you really want to stick with your current approach, you could do the following:
{
window.Loch1G = $('#m1-Rundenanalyse-Datum').val(); //In the strings just the number is changing
window.Loch2G = $('#m1-Rundenanalyse-Turnier').val();
var x=1;
while (x <= 2) {
if (window["Loch" + x + "G"] == ""){ //Next String is genrated (x=x+1)
alert("Eingabe war leer");
}
x=x+1;
}
}
But I can't think why you'd want to; plus the use of global variables is poor practice as it explicitly makes those variables available to every closure within the document, which allows them to be easily, and accidentally, overwritten.
In a reasonably up-to-date browser, that implements Array.prototype.every, you could dispense with the explicit iteration:
var lochs = [];
lochs.push($('#m1-Rundenanalyse-Datum').val());
lochs.push($('#m1-Rundenanalyse-Turnier').val());
if (!lochs.every(function(a){ return a !== ''; })) {
alert("Eingabe war leer");
}
JS Fiddle demos: passes (no alert), fails (alerts).