The Questions and answers from stackoverflow!
Q:
How do I get random item form items?
var items = Array(523,3452,334,31,...5346);
A:
var item = items[Math.floor(Math.random() * items.length)];
Q:
Is there a way to generate a random number in a specified range (e.g. from 1 to 6: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, or 6) in JavaScript?
A:
If you wanted to get between 1 and 6, you would calculate:
Math.floor(Math.random() * 6) + 1
Where:
1is the start number6is the number of possible results(1 + start (6) - end (1))
What it does "extra" is it allows random intervals that do not start with 1. So you can get a random number from 10 to 15 for example. Flexibility.
function randomIntFromInterval(min,max){
return Math.floor(Math.random() * (max - min + 1) + min);
}
Q:
I am trying to print an integer in JavaScript with commas as thousands separators. For example, I want to show the number 1234567 as 1,234,567. How would I go about doing this?
A:
function numberWithCommas(x) {
return x.toString().replace(/\B(?=(\d{3})+(?!\d))/g, ",")
}
@neu-rah mentioned that this function adds commas in undesirable places if there are more than 3 digits after the decimal point. If this is a problem, you can use this function:
function numberWithCommas(x) {
var parts = x.toString().split(".");
parts[0] = parts[0].replace(/\B(?=(\d{3})+(?!\d))/g, ",");
return parts.join(".");
}
Q:
I want a 5 character string composed of characters picked randomly from the set [a-zA-Z0-9]. What's the best way to do this with JavaScript?
A:
function makeid() {
var text = "";
var possible = "ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz0123456789";
for (var i = 0; i < 5; i++)
text += possible.charAt(Math.floor(Math.random() * possible.length));
return text;
}
or:
Math.random().toString(36).substring(7);
or:
Math.random().toString(36).substr(2, 5);
Q:
How can i redirect the user from one page to another using JavaScript or jQuery?
A:
If you want to simulate someone clicking on a link, use location.href.
If you want to simulate an HTTP redirect, use location.replace.
// similar behavior as an HTTP redirect
window.location.replace("http://stackoverflow.com");
// similar behavior as clicking on a link
window.location.href = "http://stackoverflow.com";
Q:
Given a string of JSON data, how can you safely turn that string into a JavaScript object?
A:
JSON.parse(jsonString);
Is a pure JavaScript approach so long as you can require a reasonably modern browser.
Q:
If I defined an object in JS with:
var j={"name":"binchen"};
How can I convert the object to JSON? The output string should be:
'{"name":"binchen"}'
A:
All current browsers have native JSON support built in. So as long as you're not dealing with prehistoric browsers like IE6/7 you can do it just as easily as that:
var j={"name":"binchen"};
JSON.stringify(j); // '{"name":"binchen"}'
Q:
What is the best way to compare objects in JavaScript?
Example:
var user1 = {name : "nerd", org: "dev"};
var user2 = {name : "nerd", org: "dev"};
var eq = user1 == user2;
alert(eq); // gives false
I know that two objects are equal if they refer to the exact same object, but is there a way to check if they have the same attributes' values?
A:
Unfortunately there is no perfect way, unless you use _proto_ recursively and access all non-enumerable properties, but this works in Firefox only.
So the best I can do is to guess usage scenarios.
1) Fast and limited.
Works when you have simple JSON-style objects without methods and DOM nodes inside:
JSON.stringify(obj1) === JSON.stringify(obj2)
The ORDER of the properties IS IMPORTANT, so this method will return false for following objects:
x = {a: 1, b: 2};
y = {b: 2, a: 1};
2) Slow and more generic.
Compares objects without digging into prototypes, then compares properties' projections recursively, and also compares constructors.
This is almost correct algorithm:
function deepCompare () {
var i, l, leftChain, rightChain;
function compare2Objects (x, y) {
var p;
// remember that NaN === NaN returns false
// and isNaN(undefined) returns true
if (isNaN(x) && isNaN(y) && typeof x === 'number' && typeof y === 'number'){
return true;
}
// Compare primitives and functions.
// Check if both arguments link to the same object.
// Especially useful on the step where we compare prototypes
if (x === y) {
return true;
}
// Works in case when functions are created in constructor.
// Comparing dates is a common scenario. Another built-ins?
// We can even handle functions passed across iframes
if ((typeof x === 'function' && typeof y === 'function') ||
(x instanceof Date && y instanceof Date) ||
(x instanceof RegExp && y instanceof RegExp) ||
(x instanceof String && y instanceof String) ||
(x instanceof Number && y instanceof Number)) {
return x.toString() === y.toString();
}
// At last checking prototypes as good as we can
if (!(x instanceof Object && y instanceof Object)) {
return false;
}
if (x.isPrototypeOf(y) || y.isPrototypeOf(x)) {
return false;
}
if (x.constructor !== y.constructor) {
return false;
}
if (x.prototype !== y.prototype) {
return false;
}
// Check for infinitive linking loops
if (leftChain.indexOf(x) > -1 || rightChain.indexOf(y) > -1) {
return false;
}
// Quick checking of one object being a subset of another.
// todo: cache the structure of arguments[0] for performance
for (p in y) {
if (y.hasOwnProperty(p) !== x.hasOwnProperty(p)) {
return false;
}
else if (typeof y[p] !== typeof x[p]) {
return false;
}
}
for (p in x) {
if (y.hasOwnProperty(p) !== x.hasOwnProperty(p)) {
return false;
}
else if (typeof y[p] !== typeof x[p]) {
return false;
}
switch (typeof (x[p])) {
case 'object':
case 'function':
leftChain.push(x);
rightChain.push(y);
if (!compare2Objects (x[p], y[p])) {
return false;
}
leftChain.pop();
rightChain.pop();
break;
default:
if (x[p] !== y[p]) {
return false;
}
break;
}
}
return true;
}
if (arguments.length < 1) {
return true; //Die silently? Don't know how to handle such case, please help...
// throw "Need two or more arguments to compare";
}
for (i = 1, l = arguments.length; i < l; i++) {
leftChain = []; //Todo: this can be cached
rightChain = [];
if (!compare2Objects(arguments[0], arguments[i])) {
return false;
}
}
return true;
}
Known issues (well, they have very low priority, probably you'll never notice them):
- objects with different prototype structure but same projection
- functions may have identical text but refer to different closures
Tests: passes tests are from How to determine equality for two JavaScript objects?.
Q:
I have one array like this:
var arr1 = ["a", "b", "c", "d"];
How can I randomize / shuffle it?
A:
The de-facto unbiased shuffle algorithm is the Fisher-Yates (aka Knuth) Shuffle. See https://github.com/coolaj86/knuth-shuffle
You can see a great visualization here (and the original post linked to this)
function shuffle(array) {
var currentIndex = array.length, temporaryValue, randomIndex;
// While there remain elements to shuffle...
while (0 !== currentIndex) {
// Pick a remaining element...
randomIndex = Math.floor(Math.random() * currentIndex);
currentIndex -= 1;
// And swap it with the current element.
temporaryValue = array[currentIndex];
array[currentIndex] = array[randomIndex];
array[randomIndex] = temporaryValue;
}
return array;
}
// Used like so
var arr = [2, 11, 37, 42];
arr = shuffle(arr);
console.log(arr);
Some more info about the algorithm used.
Q:
I'm looking for any alternatives to the below for creating a JavaScript array containing 1 through to N where N is only known at runtime.
var foo = [];
for (var i = 1; i <= N; i++) {
foo.push(i);
}
To me it feels like there should be a way of doing this without the loop.
A:
You can do so:
var N = 10;
Array.apply(null, {length: N}).map(Number.call, Number)
result: [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9]
or with random values:
Array.apply(null, {length: N}).map(Function.call, Math.random)
result: [0.7082694901619107, 0.9572225909214467, 0.8586748542729765, 0.8653848143294454, 0.008339877473190427, 0.9911756622605026, 0.8133423360995948, 0.8377588465809822, 0.5577575915958732, 0.16363654541783035]
Explanation
First, note that Number.call(undefined, N) is equivalent to Number(N), which just returns N. We'll use that fact later.
Array.apply(null, [undefined, undefined, undefined]) is equivalent to Array(undefined, undefined, undefined), which produces a three-element array and assigns undefined to each element.
How can you generalize that to N elements? Consider how Array() works, which goes something like this:
function Array() {
if ( arguments.length == 1 &&
'number' === typeof arguments[0] &&
arguments[0] >= 0 && arguments &&
arguments[0] < 1 << 32 ) {
return [ … ]; // array of length arguments[0], generated by native code
}
var a = [];
for (var i = 0; i < arguments.length; i++) {
a.push(arguments[i]);
}
return a;
}
Since ECMAScript 5, Function.prototype.apply(thisArg, argsArray) also accepts a duck-typed array-like object as its second parameter. If we invoke Array.apply(null, { length: N }), then it will execute
function Array() {
var a = [];
for (var i = 0; i < /* arguments.length = */ N; i++) {
a.push(/* arguments[i] = */ undefined);
}
return a;
}
Now we have an N-element array, with each element set to undefined. When we call .map(callback, thisArg) on it, each element will be set to the result of callback.call(thisArg, element, index, array). Therefore, [undefined, undefined, …, undefined].map(Number.call, Number) would map each element to (Number.call).call(Number, undefined, index, array), which is the same as Number.call(undefined, index, array), which, as we observed earlier, evaluates to index. That completes the array whose elements are the same as their index.
Why go through the trouble of Array.apply(null, {length: N}) instead of just Array(N)? After all, both expressions would result an an N-element array of undefined elements. The difference is that in the former expression, each element is explicitly set to undefined, whereas in the latter, each element was never set. According to the documentation of .map():
callbackis invoked only for indexes of the array which have assigned values; it is not invoked for indexes which have been deleted or which have never been assigned values.
Therefore, Array(N) is insufficient; Array(N).map(Number.call, Number) would result in an uninitialized array of length N.
Compatibility
Since this technique relies on behaviour of Function.prototype.apply() specified in ECMAScript 5, it will not work in pre-ECMAScript 5 browsers such as Chrome 14 and Internet Explorer 9.
In ES6 using Array from() and keys() methods.
Array.from(Array(10).keys())
//=> [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9]
Shorter version using spread operator.
[...Array(10).keys()]
//=> [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9]
In ES6 you can do:
Array(N).fill().map((e,i)=>i+1);
Changed
Array(45)toArray(N)since you've updated the question.
Q:
I've created this script to calculate the data for 10 days in advance in the formate of dd/mm/yyyy:
var MyDate = new Date();
var MyDateString = new Date();
MyDate.setDate(MyDate.getDate() + 10);
MyDateString = MyDate.getDate() + '/' + (MyDate.getMonth() + 1) + '/' + MyDate.getFullYear();
I need to have the date appear with leading zeroes on the day and month component by way of adding these rules to the script. I can't seem to get it to work.
if (MyDate.getMonth > 10) getMonth = '0' + getMonth;
and
if (MyDate.getDate < 10) get.Date = '0' + getDate;
If someone could show me where to insert these into the script I would be really appreciative.
A:
var MyDate = new Date();
var MyDateString;
MyDate.setDate(MyDate.getDate() + 20);
MyDateString = ('0' + MyDate.getDate()).slice(-2) + '/' + ('0' + (MyDate.getMonth() + 1)).slice(-2) + '/' + MyDate.getFullYear();
EDIT:
To explain, .slice(-2) gives us the last two characters of the string.
So no matter what, we can add "0" to the day or month, and just ask for the last two since those are always the two we want.
So if the MyDate.getMonth() returns 9, it will be:
("0" + "9") // Giving us "09"
so adding .slice(-2) on that gives us the last two characters which is:
("0" + "9").slice(-2);
// "09"
But if MyDate.getMonth() returns 10, it will be:
("0" + "10") // Giving us "010"
so adding .slice(-2) gives us the last two characters, or:
("0" + "10").slice(-2)
// "10"
Q:
I've an annoying problem in JavaScript.
> parseInt(1 / 0, 19)
> 18
Why does parseInt return 18?
A:
The result of 1/0 is Infinity.
parseInt treats its first argument as a string which means first of all Infinity.toString() is called, producing the string "Infinity". So it works the same as if you asked it to convert "Infinity" in base 19 to decimal.
Here are the digits in base 19 along with their decimal values:
Base 19 Base 10 (decimal)
---------------------------
0 0
1 1
2 2
3 3
4 4
5 5
6 6
7 7
8 8
9 9
a 10
b 11
c 12
d 13
e 14
f 15
g 16
h 17
i 18
What happens next is that parseInt scans the input "Infinity" to find which part of it can be parsed and stops after accepting the first I (because n is not a valid digit in base 19).
Therefore it behaves as if you called parseInt("I", 19), which converts to decimal 18 by the table above.
Q:
What is the fastest way to check if an object is empty or not?
Is there a faster and better way than this:
function count_obj(obj){
var i = 0;
for(var key in obj){
++i;
}
return i;
}
A:
I'm assuming that by empty you mean "has no properties of its own".
// Speed up calls to hasOwnProperty
var hasOwnProperty = Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty;
function isEmpty(obj) {
// null and undefined are "empty"
if (obj == null) return true;
// Assume if it has a length property with a non-zero value
// that that property is correct.
if (obj.length > 0) return false;
if (obj.length === 0) return true;
// If it isn't an object at this point
// it is empty, but it can't be anything *but* empty
// Is it empty? Depends on your application.
if (typeof obj !== "object") return true;
// Otherwise, does it have any properties of its own?
// Note that this doesn't handle
// toString and valueOf enumeration bugs in IE < 9
for (var key in obj) {
if (hasOwnProperty.call(obj, key)) return false;
}
return true;
}
Examples:
isEmpty(""), // true
isEmpty(33), // true (arguably could be a TypeError)
isEmpty([]), // true
isEmpty({}), // true
isEmpty({length: 0, custom_property: []}), // true
isEmpty("Hello"), // false
isEmpty([1,2,3]), // false
isEmpty({test: 1}), // false
isEmpty({length: 3, custom_property: [1,2,3]}) // false
If you only need to handle ECMAScript5 browsers, you can use Object.getOwnPropertyNames instead of the hasOwnProperty loop:
if (Object.getOwnPropertyNames(obj).length > 0) return false;
This will ensure that even if the object only has non-enumerable properties isEmpty will still give you the correct results.
// because Object.keys(new Date()).length === 0;
// we have to do some additional check
Object.keys(obj).length === 0 && obj.constructor === Object
Pre-ECMA 5:
function isEmpty(obj) {
for(var prop in obj) {
if(obj.hasOwnProperty(prop))
return false;
}
return JSON.stringify(obj) === JSON.stringify({});
}
There's no easy way to do this. You'll have to loop over the properties explicitly:
function isEmpty(obj) {
for(var prop in obj) {
if(obj.hasOwnProperty(prop))
return false;
}
return true;
}
If ECMAScript 5 support is available, you can use Object.keys() instead:
function isEmpty(obj) {
return Object.keys(obj).length === 0;
}
Q:
I have an array of numbers that I need to make sure are unique. I found the code snippet below on the internet and it works great until the array has a zero in it. I found this other script here on SO that looks almost exactly like it, but it doesn't fail.
So for the sake of helping me learn, can someone help me determine where the prototype script is going wrong?
Array.prototype.getUnique = function() {
var o = {}, a = [], i, e;
for (i = 0; e = this[i]; i++) {o[e] = 1};
for (e in o) {a.push (e)};
return a;
}
A:
With JavaScript 1.6 / ECMAScript 5 you can use the native filter method of an Array in the following way to get an array with unique values:
function onlyUnique(value, index, self) {
return self.indexOf(value) === index;
}
// usage example:
var a = ['a', 1, 'a', 2, '1'];
var unique = a.filter( onlyUnique ); // returns ['a', 1, 2, '1']
The native method filter will loop through the array and leave only those entries that pass the given callback function onlyUnique.
onlyUnique checks, if the given value is the first occurring. If not, it must be a duplicate and will not be copied.
This solution works without any extra library like jQuery or prototype.js.
It works for arrays with mixed value types too.
For old Browsers (<ie9), that do not support the native methods filter and indexOf you can find work arounds in the MDN documentation for filter and indexOf.
If you want to keep the last occurrence of a value, simple replace indexOf by lastIndexOf.
With ES6 it could be shorten to this:
// usage example:
var myArray = ['a', 1, 'a', 2, '1'];
var unique = myArray.filter((v, i, a) => a.indexOf(v) === i);
// unique is ['a', 1, 2, '1']
Thanks to Camilo Martin for hint in comment.
ES6 has a native object Set to store unique values. To get an array with unique values you could do now this:
var myArray = ['a', 1, 'a', 2, '1'];
let unique = [...new Set(myArray)];
// unique is ['a', 1, 2, '1']
The constructor of Set takes an iterable object, like Array, and the spread operator ... transform the set back into an Array. Thanks to Lukas Liese for hint in comment.
Q:
How to convert colors in RGB format to Hex format and vice versa? For example, convert '#0080C0' to (0, 128, 192).
A:
The following will do to the RGB to hex conversion and add any required zero padding:
function componentToHex(c) {
var hex = c.toString(16);
return hex.length == 1 ? "0" + hex : hex;
}
function rgbToHex(r, g, b) {
return "#" + componentToHex(r) + componentToHex(g) + componentToHex(b);
}
alert( rgbToHex(0, 51, 255) ); // #0033ff
Converting the other way:
function hexToRgb(hex) {
var result = /^#?([a-f\d]{2})([a-f\d]{2})([a-f\d]{2})$/i.exec(hex);
return result ? {
r: parseInt(result[1], 16),
g: parseInt(result[2], 16),
b: parseInt(result[3], 16)
} : null;
}
alert( hexToRgb("#0033ff").g ); // "51";
Finally, an alternative version of rgbToHex(), as discussed in @casablanca's answer and suggested in the comments by @cwolves:
function rgbToHex(r, g, b) {
return "#" + ((1 << 24) + (r << 16) + (g << 8) + b).toString(16).slice(1);
}
Update 3 December 2012:
Here's a version of hexToRgb() that also parses a shorthand hex triplet such as "#03F":
function hexToRgb(hex) {
// Expand shorthand form (e.g. "03F") to full form (e.g. "0033FF")
var shorthandRegex = /^#?([a-f\d])([a-f\d])([a-f\d])$/i;
hex = hex.replace(shorthandRegex, function(m, r, g, b) {
return r + r + g + g + b + b;
});
var result = /^#?([a-f\d]{2})([a-f\d]{2})([a-f\d]{2})$/i.exec(hex);
return result ? {
r: parseInt(result[1], 16),
g: parseInt(result[2], 16),
b: parseInt(result[3], 16)
} : null;
}
alert( hexToRgb("#0033ff").g ); // "51";
alert( hexToRgb("#03f").g ); // "51";
Q:
Say I want to sum a.x for each element in arr.
arr = [{x:1},{x:2},{x:4}]
arr.reduce(function(a,b){return a.x + b.x})
>> NaN
I have cause to believe that a.x is undefined at some point.
The following works fine
arr = [1,2,4]
arr.reduce(function(a,b){return a + b})
>> 7
What am I doing wrong in the first example?
A:
After the first iteration your're returning a number and then trying to get property x of it to add to the next object which is undefined and maths involving undefined results in NaN.
try returning an object contain an x property with the sum of the x properties of the parameters:
var arr = [{x:1},{x:2},{x:4}];
arr.reduce(function (a, b) {
return {x: a.x + b.x}; // returns object with property x
})
// ES6
arr.reduce((a, b) => ({x: a.x + b.x}));
// -> {x: 7}
Explanation added from comments:
The return value of each iteration of [].reduce used as the a variable in the next iteration.
Iteration 1: a = {x:1}, b = {x:2}, {x: 3} assigned to a in Iteration 2
Iteration 2: a = {x:3}, b = {x:4}.
The problem with your example is that you're returning a number literal.
function (a, b) {
return a.x + b.x; // returns number literal
}
Iteration 1: a = {x:1}, b = {x:2}, // returns 3 as a in next iteration
Iteration 2: a = 3, b = {x:2} returns NaN
A number literal 3 does not (typically) have a property called x so it's undefined and undefined + b.x returns NaN and NaN + <anything> is always NaN
Clarification: I prefer my method over the other top answer in this thread as I disagree with the idea that passing an option parameter to reduce with a magic number to get out a number primitive is cleaner. It may result in fewer lines written but imo it is less readable.
Q:
How can I determine whether a variable is a string or something else in JavaScript?
A:
This is what works for me:
if (typeof myVar === 'string' || myVar instanceof String)
// it's a string
else
// it's something else
Q:
What is the best way to convert:
['a','b','c']
to:
{
0: 'a',
1: 'b',
2: 'c'
}
A:
With a function like this:
function toObject(arr) {
var rv = {};
for (var i = 0; i < arr.length; ++i)
rv[i] = arr[i];
return rv;
}
Your array already is more-or-less just an object, but arrays do have some "interesting" and special behavior with respect to integer-named properties. The above will give you a plain object.
edit oh also you might want to account for "holes" in the array:
function toObject(arr) {
var rv = {};
for (var i = 0; i < arr.length; ++i)
if (arr[i] !== undefined) rv[i] = arr[i];
return rv;
}
In modern JavaScript runtimes, you can use the .reduce() method:
var obj = arr.reduce(function(acc, cur, i) {
acc[i] = cur;
return acc;
}, {});
That one also avoids "holes" in the array, because that's how .reduce() works.
Q:
I am using setInterval(fname, 10000); to call a function every 10 seconds in JavaScript. Is it possible to stop calling it on some event?
I want the user to be able to stop the repeated refresh of data.
A:
setInterval() returns an interval ID, which you can pass to clearInterval():
var refreshIntervalId = setInterval(fname, 10000);
/* later */
clearInterval(refreshIntervalId);
See the docs for setInterval() and clearInterval().
Q:
Is there a JavaScript equivalent of Java's class.getName()?
A:
Is there a JavaScript equivalent of Java's
class.getName()?
No.
But here are various hacks that all fall down in one way or another:
Here is a hack that will do what you need - be aware that it modifies the Object's prototype, something people frown upon (usually for good reason)
Object.prototype.getName = function() {
var funcNameRegex = /function (.{1,})\(/;
var results = (funcNameRegex).exec((this).constructor.toString());
return (results && results.length > 1) ? results[1] : "";
};
Now, all of your objects will have the function, getName(), that will return the name of the constructor as a string. I have tested this in FF3 and IE7, I can't speak for other implementations.
If you don't want to do that, here is a discussion on the various ways of determining types in JavaScript...
I recently updated this to be a bit more exhaustive, though it is hardly that. Corrections welcome...
Using the constructor property...
Every object has a value for its constructor property, but depending on how that object was constructed as well as what you want to do with that value, it may or may not be useful.
Generally speaking, you can use the constructor property to test the type of the object like so:
var myArray = [1,2,3];
(myArray.constructor == Array); // true
So, that works well enough for most needs. That said...
Caveats
Will not work AT ALL in many cases
This pattern, though broken, is quite common:
function Thingy() {
}
Thingy.prototype = {
method1: function() {
},
method2: function() {
}
};
Objects constructed via new Thingy will have a constructor property that points to Object, not Thingy. So we fall right at the outset; you simply cannot trust constructor in a codebase that you don't control.
Multiple Inheritance
An example where it isn't as obvious is using multiple inheritance:
function a() { this.foo = 1;}
function b() { this.bar = 2; }
b.prototype = new a(); // b inherits from a
Things now don't work as you might expect them to:
var f = new b(); // instantiate a new object with the b constructor
(f.constructor == b); // false
(f.constructor == a); // true
So, you might get unexpected results if the object your testing has a different object set as its prototype. There are ways around this outside the scope of this discussion.
There are other uses for the constructor property, some of them interesting, others not so much; for now we will not delve into those uses since it isn't relevant to this discussion.
Will not work cross-frame and cross-window
Using .constructor for type checking will break when you want to check the type of objects coming from different window objects, say that of an iframe or a popup window. This is because there's a different version of each core type constructor in each window, i.e.
iframe.contentWindow.Array === Array // false
Using the instanceof operator...
The instanceof operator is a clean way of testing object type as well, but has its own potential issues, just like the constructor property.
var myArray = [1,2,3];
(myArray instanceof Array); // true
(myArray instanceof Object); // true
But instanceof fails to work for literal values (because literals are not Objects)
3 instanceof Number // false
'abc' instanceof String // false
true instanceof Boolean // false
The literals need to be wrapped in an Object in order for instanceof to work, for example
new Number(3) instanceof Number // true
The .constructor check works fine for literals because the . method invocation implicitly wraps the literals in their respective object type
3..constructor === Number // true
'abc'.constructor === String // true
true.constructor === Boolean // true
Why two dots for the 3? Because Javascript interprets the first dot as a decimal point ;)
Will not work cross-frame and cross-window
instanceof also will not work across different windows, for the same reason as the constructor property check.
Using the name property of the constructor property...
Does not work AT ALL in many cases
Again, see above; it's quite common for constructor to be utterly and completely wrong and useless.
Does NOT work in <IE9
Using myObjectInstance.constructor.name will give you a string containing the name of the constructor function used, but is subject to the caveats about the constructor property that were mentioned earlier.
For IE9 and above, you can monkey-patch in support:
if (Function.prototype.name === undefined && Object.defineProperty !== undefined) {
Object.defineProperty(Function.prototype, 'name', {
get: function() {
var funcNameRegex = /function\s+([^\s(]+)\s*\(/;
var results = (funcNameRegex).exec((this).toString());
return (results && results.length > 1) ? results[1] : "";
},
set: function(value) {}
});
}
Updated version from the article in question. This was added 3 months after the article was published, this is the recommended version to use by the article's author Matthew Scharley. This change was inspired by comments pointing out potential pitfalls in the previous code.
if (Function.prototype.name === undefined && Object.defineProperty !== undefined) {
Object.defineProperty(Function.prototype, 'name', {
get: function() {
var funcNameRegex = /function\s([^(]{1,})\(/;
var results = (funcNameRegex).exec((this).toString());
return (results && results.length > 1) ? results[1].trim() : "";
},
set: function(value) {}
});
}
Using Object.prototype.toString
It turns out, as this post details, you can use Object.prototype.toString - the low level and generic implementation of toString - to get the type for all built-in types
Object.prototype.toString.call('abc') // [object String]
Object.prototype.toString.call(/abc/) // [object RegExp]
Object.prototype.toString.call([1,2,3]) // [object Array]
One could write a short helper function such as
function type(obj){
return Object.prototype.toString.call(obj).slice(8, -1);
}
to remove the cruft and get at just the type name
type('abc') // String
However, it will return Object for all user-defined types.
Caveats for all...
All of these are subject to one potential problem, and that is the question of how the object in question was constructed. Here are various ways of building objects and the values that the different methods of type checking will return:
// using a named function:
function Foo() { this.a = 1; }
var obj = new Foo();
(obj instanceof Object); // true
(obj instanceof Foo); // true
(obj.constructor == Foo); // true
(obj.constructor.name == "Foo"); // true
// let's add some prototypical inheritance
function Bar() { this.b = 2; }
Foo.prototype = new Bar();
obj = new Foo();
(obj instanceof Object); // true
(obj instanceof Foo); // true
(obj.constructor == Foo); // false
(obj.constructor.name == "Foo"); // false
// using an anonymous function:
obj = new (function() { this.a = 1; })();
(obj instanceof Object); // true
(obj.constructor == obj.constructor); // true
(obj.constructor.name == ""); // true
// using an anonymous function assigned to a variable
var Foo = function() { this.a = 1; };
obj = new Foo();
(obj instanceof Object); // true
(obj instanceof Foo); // true
(obj.constructor == Foo); // true
(obj.constructor.name == ""); // true
// using object literal syntax
obj = { foo : 1 };
(obj instanceof Object); // true
(obj.constructor == Object); // true
(obj.constructor.name == "Object"); // true
While not all permutations are present in this set of examples, hopefully there are enough to provide you with an idea about how messy things might get depending on your needs. Don't assume anything, if you don't understand exactly what you are after, you may end up with code breaking where you don't expect it to because of a lack of grokking the subtleties.
**NOTE:**Discussion of the
typeofoperator may appear to be a glaring omission, but it really isn't useful in helping to identify whether anobjectis a given type, since it is very simplistic. Understanding wheretypeofis useful is important, but I don't currently feel that it is terribly relevant to this discussion. My mind is open to change though. :)
Q:
How can I create static variables in Javascript?
A:
If you come from a class-based, strongly typed object-oriented language (like Java, C++ or C#) I assume that you are trying to create a variable or method associated to a "type" but not to an instance.
An example using a "classical" approach, with constructor functions maybe could help you to catch the concepts of basic OO JavaScript:
function MyClass () { // constructor function
var privateVariable = "foo"; // Private variable
this.publicVariable = "bar"; // Public variable
this.privilegedMethod = function () { // Public Method
alert(privateVariable);
};
}
// Instance method will be available to all instances but only load once in memory
MyClass.prototype.publicMethod = function () {
alert(this.publicVariable);
};
// Static variable shared by all instances
MyClass.staticProperty = "baz";
var myInstance = new MyClass();
staticProperty is defined in the MyClass object (which is a function) and has nothing to do with its created instances, JavaScript treats functions as first-class objects, so being an object, you can assign properties to a function.
Q:
Given an array [1, 2, 3, 4], how can I find the sum of its elements? (In this case, the sum would be 10.)
I thought $.each might be useful, but I'm not sure how to implement it.
A:
In Lisp, this'd be exactly the job for reduce. You'd see this kind of code:
(reduce #'+ '(1 2 3)) ; 6
Fortunately, in JavaScript, we also have reduce! Unfortunately, + is an operator, not a function. But we can make it pretty! Here, look:
var sum = [1, 2, 3].reduce(add, 0);
function add(a, b) {
return a + b;
}
console.log(sum); // 6
Isn't that pretty? :-)
Even better! If you're using ECMAScript 2015 (aka ECMAScript 6), it can be this pretty:
var sum = [1, 2, 3].reduce((a, b) => a + b, 0);
console.log(sum); // 6
Q:
Say I create an object as follows:
var myObject = {
"ircEvent": "PRIVMSG",
"method": "newURI",
"regex": "^http://.*"
};
What is the best way to remove the property regex to end up with new myObject as follows?
var myObject = {
"ircEvent": "PRIVMSG",
"method": "newURI"
};
A:
Like this:
delete myObject.regex;
// or,
delete myObject['regex'];
// or,
var prop = "regex";
delete myObject[prop];
For anyone interested in reading more about it, Stack Overflow user kangax has written an incredibly in-depth blog post about the delete statement on their blog, Understanding delete. It is highly recommended.
Q:
I have
var id="ctl03_Tabs1";
Using JavaScript, how might I get the last five characters or last character?
A:
You'll want to use the Javascript string method .substr() combined with the .length property.
var id = "ctl03_Tabs1";
var lastFive = id.substr(id.length - 5); // => "Tabs1"
var lastChar = id.substr(id.length - 1); // => "1"
This gets the characters starting at id.length - 5 and, since the second argument for .substr() is omitted, continues to the end of the string.
You can also use the .slice() method as others have pointed out below.
If you're simply looking to find the characters after the underscore, you could use this:
var tabId = id.split("_").pop(); // => "Tabs1"
This splits the string into an array on the underscore and then "pops" the last element off the array (which is the string you want).
Q:
I'm looking for a function which return boolean value if user has mobile browser or not.
I know that I can use navigator.userAgent and write that function by using regex, but user-agents are too various for different platforms. I doubt that match all possible devices would be easy, and I think this problem has been solved before many times so there should be some kind of complete solution for such task.
I was looking at this site, but sadly the script is so cryptic that I have no idea how to use it for my purpose, which is to create a function which return true / false.
A:
Using Regex (from detectmobilebrowsers.com):
Here's a function that uses an insanely long and comprehensive regex which returns a true or false value depending on whether or not the user is browsing with a mobile.
window.mobilecheck = function() {
var check = false;
(function(a){if(/(android|bb\d+|meego).+mobile|avantgo|bada\/|blackberry|blazer|compal|elaine|fennec|hiptop|iemobile|ip(hone|od)|iris|kindle|lge |maemo|midp|mmp|mobile.+firefox|netfront|opera m(ob|in)i|palm( os)?|phone|p(ixi|re)\/|plucker|pocket|psp|series(4|6)0|symbian|treo|up\.(browser|link)|vodafone|wap|windows ce|xda|xiino/i.test(a)||/1207|6310|6590|3gso|4thp|50[1-6]i|770s|802s|a wa|abac|ac(er|oo|s\-)|ai(ko|rn)|al(av|ca|co)|amoi|an(ex|ny|yw)|aptu|ar(ch|go)|as(te|us)|attw|au(di|\-m|r |s )|avan|be(ck|ll|nq)|bi(lb|rd)|bl(ac|az)|br(e|v)w|bumb|bw\-(n|u)|c55\/|capi|ccwa|cdm\-|cell|chtm|cldc|cmd\-|co(mp|nd)|craw|da(it|ll|ng)|dbte|dc\-s|devi|dica|dmob|do(c|p)o|ds(12|\-d)|el(49|ai)|em(l2|ul)|er(ic|k0)|esl8|ez([4-7]0|os|wa|ze)|fetc|fly(\-|_)|g1 u|g560|gene|gf\-5|g\-mo|go(\.w|od)|gr(ad|un)|haie|hcit|hd\-(m|p|t)|hei\-|hi(pt|ta)|hp( i|ip)|hs\-c|ht(c(\-| |_|a|g|p|s|t)|tp)|hu(aw|tc)|i\-(20|go|ma)|i230|iac( |\-|\/)|ibro|idea|ig01|ikom|im1k|inno|ipaq|iris|ja(t|v)a|jbro|jemu|jigs|kddi|keji|kgt( |\/)|klon|kpt |kwc\-|kyo(c|k)|le(no|xi)|lg( g|\/(k|l|u)|50|54|\-[a-w])|libw|lynx|m1\-w|m3ga|m50\/|ma(te|ui|xo)|mc(01|21|ca)|m\-cr|me(rc|ri)|mi(o8|oa|ts)|mmef|mo(01|02|bi|de|do|t(\-| |o|v)|zz)|mt(50|p1|v )|mwbp|mywa|n10[0-2]|n20[2-3]|n30(0|2)|n50(0|2|5)|n7(0(0|1)|10)|ne((c|m)\-|on|tf|wf|wg|wt)|nok(6|i)|nzph|o2im|op(ti|wv)|oran|owg1|p800|pan(a|d|t)|pdxg|pg(13|\-([1-8]|c))|phil|pire|pl(ay|uc)|pn\-2|po(ck|rt|se)|prox|psio|pt\-g|qa\-a|qc(07|12|21|32|60|\-[2-7]|i\-)|qtek|r380|r600|raks|rim9|ro(ve|zo)|s55\/|sa(ge|ma|mm|ms|ny|va)|sc(01|h\-|oo|p\-)|sdk\/|se(c(\-|0|1)|47|mc|nd|ri)|sgh\-|shar|sie(\-|m)|sk\-0|sl(45|id)|sm(al|ar|b3|it|t5)|so(ft|ny)|sp(01|h\-|v\-|v )|sy(01|mb)|t2(18|50)|t6(00|10|18)|ta(gt|lk)|tcl\-|tdg\-|tel(i|m)|tim\-|t\-mo|to(pl|sh)|ts(70|m\-|m3|m5)|tx\-9|up(\.b|g1|si)|utst|v400|v750|veri|vi(rg|te)|vk(40|5[0-3]|\-v)|vm40|voda|vulc|vx(52|53|60|61|70|80|81|83|85|98)|w3c(\-| )|webc|whit|wi(g |nc|nw)|wmlb|wonu|x700|yas\-|your|zeto|zte\-/i.test(a.substr(0,4))) check = true;})(navigator.userAgent||navigator.vendor||window.opera);
return check;
};
For those wishing to include tablets in this test (though arguably, you shouldn't), you can use the following function:
window.mobileAndTabletcheck = function() {
var check = false;
(function(a){if(/(android|bb\d+|meego).+mobile|avantgo|bada\/|blackberry|blazer|compal|elaine|fennec|hiptop|iemobile|ip(hone|od)|iris|kindle|lge |maemo|midp|mmp|mobile.+firefox|netfront|opera m(ob|in)i|palm( os)?|phone|p(ixi|re)\/|plucker|pocket|psp|series(4|6)0|symbian|treo|up\.(browser|link)|vodafone|wap|windows ce|xda|xiino|android|ipad|playbook|silk/i.test(a)||/1207|6310|6590|3gso|4thp|50[1-6]i|770s|802s|a wa|abac|ac(er|oo|s\-)|ai(ko|rn)|al(av|ca|co)|amoi|an(ex|ny|yw)|aptu|ar(ch|go)|as(te|us)|attw|au(di|\-m|r |s )|avan|be(ck|ll|nq)|bi(lb|rd)|bl(ac|az)|br(e|v)w|bumb|bw\-(n|u)|c55\/|capi|ccwa|cdm\-|cell|chtm|cldc|cmd\-|co(mp|nd)|craw|da(it|ll|ng)|dbte|dc\-s|devi|dica|dmob|do(c|p)o|ds(12|\-d)|el(49|ai)|em(l2|ul)|er(ic|k0)|esl8|ez([4-7]0|os|wa|ze)|fetc|fly(\-|_)|g1 u|g560|gene|gf\-5|g\-mo|go(\.w|od)|gr(ad|un)|haie|hcit|hd\-(m|p|t)|hei\-|hi(pt|ta)|hp( i|ip)|hs\-c|ht(c(\-| |_|a|g|p|s|t)|tp)|hu(aw|tc)|i\-(20|go|ma)|i230|iac( |\-|\/)|ibro|idea|ig01|ikom|im1k|inno|ipaq|iris|ja(t|v)a|jbro|jemu|jigs|kddi|keji|kgt( |\/)|klon|kpt |kwc\-|kyo(c|k)|le(no|xi)|lg( g|\/(k|l|u)|50|54|\-[a-w])|libw|lynx|m1\-w|m3ga|m50\/|ma(te|ui|xo)|mc(01|21|ca)|m\-cr|me(rc|ri)|mi(o8|oa|ts)|mmef|mo(01|02|bi|de|do|t(\-| |o|v)|zz)|mt(50|p1|v )|mwbp|mywa|n10[0-2]|n20[2-3]|n30(0|2)|n50(0|2|5)|n7(0(0|1)|10)|ne((c|m)\-|on|tf|wf|wg|wt)|nok(6|i)|nzph|o2im|op(ti|wv)|oran|owg1|p800|pan(a|d|t)|pdxg|pg(13|\-([1-8]|c))|phil|pire|pl(ay|uc)|pn\-2|po(ck|rt|se)|prox|psio|pt\-g|qa\-a|qc(07|12|21|32|60|\-[2-7]|i\-)|qtek|r380|r600|raks|rim9|ro(ve|zo)|s55\/|sa(ge|ma|mm|ms|ny|va)|sc(01|h\-|oo|p\-)|sdk\/|se(c(\-|0|1)|47|mc|nd|ri)|sgh\-|shar|sie(\-|m)|sk\-0|sl(45|id)|sm(al|ar|b3|it|t5)|so(ft|ny)|sp(01|h\-|v\-|v )|sy(01|mb)|t2(18|50)|t6(00|10|18)|ta(gt|lk)|tcl\-|tdg\-|tel(i|m)|tim\-|t\-mo|to(pl|sh)|ts(70|m\-|m3|m5)|tx\-9|up(\.b|g1|si)|utst|v400|v750|veri|vi(rg|te)|vk(40|5[0-3]|\-v)|vm40|voda|vulc|vx(52|53|60|61|70|80|81|83|85|98)|w3c(\-| )|webc|whit|wi(g |nc|nw)|wmlb|wonu|x700|yas\-|your|zeto|zte\-/i.test(a.substr(0,4))) check = true;})(navigator.userAgent||navigator.vendor||window.opera);
return check;
};
The Original Answer
You can do this by simply running through a list of devices and checking if the useragent matches anything like so:
function detectmob() {
if( navigator.userAgent.match(/Android/i)
|| navigator.userAgent.match(/webOS/i)
|| navigator.userAgent.match(/iPhone/i)
|| navigator.userAgent.match(/iPad/i)
|| navigator.userAgent.match(/iPod/i)
|| navigator.userAgent.match(/BlackBerry/i)
|| navigator.userAgent.match(/Windows Phone/i)
){
return true;
}
else {
return false;
}
}
However since you believe that this method is unreliable, You could assume that any device that had a resolution of800x600 or less was a mobile device too, narrowing your target even more (although these days many mobile devices have much greater resolutions than this)
i.e
function detectmob() {
if(window.innerWidth <= 800 && window.innerHeight <= 600) {
return true;
} else {
return false;
}
}
Reference:
Q:
How do I check if an object has a property in JavaScript?
Consider:
x = {'key': 1};
if ( x.hasOwnProperty('key') ) {
//Do this
}
Is that the best way to do it?
A:
I'm really confused by the answers that have been given - most of them are just outright incorrect. Of course you can have object properties that have undefined, null, or false values. So simply reducing the property check to typeof this[property] or, even worse, x.key will give you completely misleading results.
It depends on what you're looking for. If you want to know if an object physically contains a property (and it is not coming from somewhere up on the prototype chain) then object.hasOwnProperty is the way to go. All modern browsers support it. (It was missing in older versions of Safari - 2.0.1 and older - but those versions of the browser are rarely used any more.)
If what you're looking for is if an object has a property on it that is iterable (when you iterate over the properties of the object, it will appear) then doing: prop in object will give you your desired effect.
Since using hasOwnProperty is probably what you want, and considering that you may want a fallback method, I present to you the following solution:
var obj = {
a: undefined,
b: null,
c: false
};
// a, b, c all found
for ( var prop in obj ) {
document.writeln( "Object1: " + prop );
}
function Class(){
this.a = undefined;
this.b = null;
this.c = false;
}
Class.prototype = {
a: undefined,
b: true,
c: true,
d: true,
e: true
};
var obj2 = new Class();
// a, b, c, d, e found
for ( var prop in obj2 ) {
document.writeln( "Object2: " + prop );
}
function hasOwnProperty(obj, prop) {
var proto = obj.__proto__ || obj.constructor.prototype;
return (prop in obj) &&
(!(prop in proto) || proto[prop] !== obj[prop]);
}
if ( Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty ) {
var hasOwnProperty = function(obj, prop) {
return obj.hasOwnProperty(prop);
}
}
// a, b, c found in modern browsers
// b, c found in Safari 2.0.1 and older
for ( var prop in obj2 ) {
if ( hasOwnProperty(obj2, prop) ) {
document.writeln( "Object2 w/ hasOwn: " + prop );
}
}
The above is a working, cross-browser, solution to hasOwnProperty, with one caveat: It is unable to distinguish between cases where an identical property is on the prototype and on the instance - it just assumes that it's coming from the prototype. You could shift it to be more lenient or strict, based upon your situation, but at the very least this should be more helpful.
Q:
I would like a JavaScript function to have optional arguments which I set a default on, which gets used if the value isn't defined. In Ruby you can do it like this:
def read_file(file, delete_after = false)
# code
end
Does this work in JavaScript?
function read_file(file, delete_after = false) {
// Code
}
A:
From ES6/ES2015, default parameters is in the language specification.
function read_file(file, delete_after = false) {
// Code
}
just works.
Reference: Default Parameters - MDN
Default function parameters allow formal parameters to be initialized with default values if no value or
undefinedis passed.
You can also simulate default named parameters via destructuring:
// the `= {}` below lets you call the function without any parameters
function myFor({ start = 5, end = 1, step = -1 } = {}) { // (A)
// Use the variables `start`, `end` and `step` here
···
}
Pre ES2015,
There are a lot of ways, but this is my preferred method - it lets you pass in anything you want, including false or null. (typeof null == "object")
function foo(a, b){
a = typeof a !== 'undefined' ? a : 42;
b = typeof b !== 'undefined' ? b : 'default_b';
...
}
Q:
How do I trim a string in JavaScript?
A:
Since new Browsers (IE9+) have trim() already implemented, you should only implement trim() if it is not already available on the Prototype-Object (overriding it is a huge performance hit). This is generally recommended when extending Native Objects! Note that the added property is enumerable unless you use ES5 Object.defineProperty!
For those browsers who does not support trim(), you can use this polyfill from MDN:
if (!String.prototype.trim) {
(function() {
// Make sure we trim BOM and NBSP
var rtrim = /^[\s\uFEFF\xA0]+|[\s\uFEFF\xA0]+$/g;
String.prototype.trim = function() {
return this.replace(rtrim, '');
};
})();
}
See this:
String.prototype.trim=function(){return this.replace(/^\s+|\s+$/g, '');};
String.prototype.ltrim=function(){return this.replace(/^\s+/,'');};
String.prototype.rtrim=function(){return this.replace(/\s+$/,'');};
String.prototype.fulltrim=function(){return this.replace(/(?:(?:^|\n)\s+|\s+(?:$|\n))/g,'').replace(/\s+/g,' ');};
Q:
I read the following objects using Ajax and stored them in an array:
var homes = [
{
"h_id": "3",
"city": "Dallas",
"state": "TX",
"zip": "75201",
"price": "162500"
}, {
"h_id": "4",
"city": "Bevery Hills",
"state": "CA",
"zip": "90210",
"price": "319250"
}, {
"h_id": "5",
"city": "New York",
"state": "NY",
"zip": "00010",
"price": "962500"
}
];
How do I create a function to sort the objects by the price property in ascending or descending order using only JavaScript?
Q:
Sort homes by price in ascending order:
homes.sort(function(a, b) {
return parseFloat(a.price) - parseFloat(b.price);
});
Some documentation can be found here.
Q:
If there is an Javascript object:
var objects={...};
Suppose, it has more than 50 properties, without knowing the property names (that's without knowing the keys) how to get each property value in a loop?
A:
Depending on which browsers you have to support, this can be done in a number of ways. The overwhelming majority of browsers in the wild support ECMAScript 5 (ES5), but be warned that many of the examples below use Object.keys, which is not available in IE < 9. See the compatibility table.
ECMAScript 3+
If you have to support older versions of IE, then this is the option for you:
for (var key in obj) {
if (Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty.call(obj, key)) {
var val = obj[key];
// use val
}
}
The nested if makes sure that you don't enumerate over properties in the prototype chain of the object (which is the behaviour you almost certainly want). You must use
Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty.call(obj, key) // ok
rather than
obj.hasOwnProperty(key) // bad
because ECMAScript 5+ allows you to create prototypeless objects with Object.create(null), and these objects will not have the hasOwnProperty method. Naughty code might also produce objects which override the hasOwnProperty method.
ECMAScript 5+
You can use these methods in any browser that supports ECMAScript 5 and above. These get values from an object and avoid enumerating over the prototype chain. Where obj is your object:
var keys = Object.keys(obj);
for (var i = 0; i < keys.length; i++) {
var val = obj[keys[i]];
// use val
}
If you want something a little more compact or you want to be careful with functions in loops, then Array.prototype.forEach is your friend:
Object.keys(obj).forEach(function (key) {
var val = obj[key];
// use val
});
The next method builds an array containing the values of an object. This is convenient for looping over.
var vals = Object.keys(obj).map(function (key) {
return obj[key];
});
// use vals array
If you want to make those using Object.keys safe against null (as for-in is), then you can do Object.keys(obj || {})....
Object.keys returns enumerable properties. For iterating over simple objects, this is usually sufficient. If you have something with non-enumerable properties that you need to work with, you may use Object.getOwnPropertyNames in place of Object.keys.
ECMAScript 2015+ (A.K.A. ES6)
Arrays are easier to iterate with ECMAScript 2015. You can use this to your advantage when working with values one-by–one in a loop:
for (const key of Object.keys(obj)) {
const val = obj[key];
// use val
}
Using ECMAScript 2015 fat-arrow functions, mapping the object to an array of values becomes a one-liner:
const vals = Object.keys(obj).map(key => obj[key]);
// use vals array
ECMAScript 2015 introduces Symbol, instances of which may be used as property names. To get the symbols of an object to enumerate over, use Object.getOwnPropertySymbols (this function is why Symbol can't be used to make private properties). The new Reflect API from ECMAScript 2015 provides Reflect.ownKeys, which returns a list of property names (including non-enumerable ones) and symbols.
Array comprehensions (do not attempt to use)
Array comprehensions were removed from ECMAScript 6 before publication. Prior to their removal, a solution would have looked like:
const vals = [for (key of Object.keys(obj)) obj[key]];
// use vals array
ECMAScript 2017+
ECMAScript 2016 adds features which do not impact this subject. The ECMAScript 2017 specification adds Object.values and Object.entries. Both return arrays (which will be surprising to some given the analogy with Array.entries). Object.values can be used as is or with a for-of loop.
const values = Object.values(obj);
// use values array or:
for (const val of Object.values(obj)) {
// use val
}
If you want to use both the key and the value, then Object.entries is for you. It produces an array filled with [key, value] pairs. You can use this as is, or (note also the ECMAScript 2015 destructuring assignment) in a for-of loop:
for (const [key, val] of Object.entries(obj)) {
// use key and val
}
Object.values shim
Finally, as noted in the comments and by teh_senaus in another answer, it may be worth using one of these as a shim. Don't worry, the following does not change the prototype, it just adds a method to Object (which is much less dangerous). Using fat-arrow functions, this can be done in one line too:
Object.values = obj => Object.keys(obj).map(key => obj[key]);
which you can now use like
// ['one', 'two', 'three']
var values = Object.values({ a: 'one', b: 'two', c: 'three' });
If you want to avoid shimming when a native Object.values exists, then you can do:
Object.values = Object.values || (obj => Object.keys(obj).map(key => obj[key]));
Finally...
Be aware of the browsers/versions you need to support. The above are correct where the methods or language features are implemented. For example, support for ECMAScript 2015 was switched off by default in V8 until recently, which powered browsers such as Chrome. Features from ECMAScript 2015 should be be avoided until the browsers you intend to support implement the features that you need. If you use babel to compile your code to ECMAScript 5, then you have access to all the features in this answer.
Q:
Is there a way to return the difference between two arrays in JavaScript?
For example:
var a1 = ['a', 'b'];
var a2 = ['a', 'b', 'c', 'd'];
// need ["c", "d"]
Any advice greatly appreciated.
A:
Array.prototype.diff = function(a) {
return this.filter(function(i) {return a.indexOf(i) < 0;});
};
////////////////////
// Examples
////////////////////
[1,2,3,4,5,6].diff( [3,4,5] );
// => [1, 2, 6]
["test1", "test2","test3","test4","test5","test6"].diff(["test1","test2","test3","test4"]);
// => ["test5", "test6"]
Note
indexOfandfilterare not available in ie before ie9.
There is a better way using ES6:
let difference = arr1.filter(x => arr2.indexOf(x) == -1);
For [1,2,3] [2,3] it will yield [1]. On the other hand, for [1,2,3] [2,3,5] will return the same thing.
For a symmetric difference, you can do:
let difference = arr1
.filter(x => arr2.indexOf(x) == -1)
.concat(arr2.filter(x => arr1.indexOf(x) == -1));
This way, you will get an array containing all the elements of arr1 that are not in arr2 and vice-versa
Q:
I've heard this quite a few times. Are JavaScript loops really faster when counting backward? If so, why? I've seen a few test suite examples showing that reversed loops are quicker, but I can't find any explanation as to why!
I'm assuming it's because the loop no longer has to evaluate a property each time it checks to see if it's finished and it just checks against the final numeric value.
I.e.
for (var i = count - 1; i >= 0; i--){
// count is only evaluated once and then the comparison is always on 0.
}
A:
It's not that i-- is faster than i++. Actually, they're both equally fast.
What takes time in ascending loops is evaluating, for each i, the size of your array. In this loop:
for(var i = array.length; i--;)
You evaluate .length only once, when you declare i, whereas for this loop
for(var i = 1; i <= array.length; i++)
you evaluate .length each time you increment i, when you check if i <= array.length.
In most cases you shouldn't even worry about this kind of optimization.
Q:
Usually I would expect a String.contains() method but there doesn't seem to be one. What is a reasonable way to check for this?
A:
Here is a list of current possibilities:
1. indexOf
var string = "foo",
substring = "oo";
string.indexOf(substring) !== -1;
String.prototype.indexOf returns the position of the string in the other string. If not found, it will return -1.
2. (ES6) includes - go to answer, or this answer
var string = "foo",
substring = "oo";
string.includes(substring);
3. search - go to answer
var string = "foo",
expr = /oo/;
string.search(expr);
4. lodash includes - go to answer
var string = "foo",
substring = "oo";
_.includes(string, substring);
5. RegExp - go to answer
var string = "foo",
expr = /oo/; // no quotes here
expr.test(string);
6. Match - go to answer
var string = "foo",
expr = /oo/;
string.match(expr);
Performance tests are showing that indexOf might be the best choice, if it comes to a point where speed matters.
You can easily add a contains method to String with this statement:
String.prototype.contains = function(it) { return this.indexOf(it) != -1; };
Note: see the comments below for a valid argument for not using this. My advice: use your own judgement.
Alternatively:
if (typeof String.prototype.contains === 'undefined') {
String.prototype.contains = function(it) {
return this.indexOf(it) != -1;
};
}