Related
I've been trying to calculate median but still I've got some mathematical issues I guess as I couldn't get the correct median value and couldn't figure out why. Here's the code;
class StatsCollector {
constructor() {
this.inputNumber = 0;
this.average = 0;
this.timeout = 19000;
this.frequencies = new Map();
for (let i of Array(this.timeout).keys()) {
this.frequencies.set(i, 0);
}
}
pushValue(responseTimeMs) {
let req = responseTimeMs;
if (req > this.timeout) {
req = this.timeout;
}
this.average = (this.average * this.inputNumber + req) / (this.inputNumber + 1);
console.log(responseTimeMs / 1000)
let groupIndex = Math.floor(responseTimeMs / 1000);
this.frequencies.set(groupIndex, this.frequencies.get(groupIndex) + 1);
this.inputNumber += 1;
}
getMedian() {
let medianElement = 0;
if (this.inputNumber <= 0) {
return 0;
}
if (this.inputNumber == 1) {
return this.average
}
if (this.inputNumber == 2) {
return this.average
}
if (this.inputNumber > 2) {
medianElement = this.inputNumber / 2;
}
let minCumulativeFreq = 0;
let maxCumulativeFreq = 0;
let cumulativeFreq = 0;
let freqGroup = 0;
for (let i of Array(20).keys()) {
if (medianElement <= cumulativeFreq + this.frequencies.get(i)) {
minCumulativeFreq = cumulativeFreq;
maxCumulativeFreq = cumulativeFreq + this.frequencies.get(i);
freqGroup = i;
break;
}
cumulativeFreq += this.frequencies.get(i);
}
return (((medianElement - minCumulativeFreq) / (maxCumulativeFreq - minCumulativeFreq)) + (freqGroup)) * 1000;
}
getAverage() {
return this.average;
}
}
Here's the snapshot of the results when I enter the values of
342,654,987,1093,2234,6243,7087,20123
The correct result should be;
Median: 1663.5
Change your median method to this:
function median(values){
if(values.length ===0) throw new Error("No inputs");
values.sort(function(a,b){
return a-b;
});
var half = Math.floor(values.length / 2);
if (values.length % 2)
return values[half];
return (values[half - 1] + values[half]) / 2.0;
}
fiddle
Here's another solution:
function median(numbers) {
const sorted = Array.from(numbers).sort((a, b) => a - b);
const middle = Math.floor(sorted.length / 2);
if (sorted.length % 2 === 0) {
return (sorted[middle - 1] + sorted[middle]) / 2;
}
return sorted[middle];
}
console.log(median([4, 5, 7, 1, 33]));
The solutions above - sort then find middle - are fine, but slow on large data sets. Sorting the data first has a complexity of n x log(n).
There is a faster median algorithm, which consists in segregating the array in two according to a pivot, then looking for the median in the larger set. Here is some javascript code, but here is a more detailed explanation
// Trying some array
alert(quickselect_median([7,3,5])); // 2300,5,4,0,123,2,76,768,28]));
function quickselect_median(arr) {
const L = arr.length, halfL = L/2;
if (L % 2 == 1)
return quickselect(arr, halfL);
else
return 0.5 * (quickselect(arr, halfL - 1) + quickselect(arr, halfL));
}
function quickselect(arr, k) {
// Select the kth element in arr
// arr: List of numerics
// k: Index
// return: The kth element (in numerical order) of arr
if (arr.length == 1)
return arr[0];
else {
const pivot = arr[0];
const lows = arr.filter((e)=>(e<pivot));
const highs = arr.filter((e)=>(e>pivot));
const pivots = arr.filter((e)=>(e==pivot));
if (k < lows.length) // the pivot is too high
return quickselect(lows, k);
else if (k < lows.length + pivots.length)// We got lucky and guessed the median
return pivot;
else // the pivot is too low
return quickselect(highs, k - lows.length - pivots.length);
}
}
Astute readers will notice a few things:
I simply transliterated Russel Cohen's Python solution into JS,
so all kudos to him.
There are several small optimisations worth
doing, but there's parallelisation worth doing, and the code as is
is easier to change in either a quicker single-threaded, or quicker
multi-threaded, version.
This is the average linear time
algorithm, there is more efficient a deterministic linear time version, see Russel's
post for details, including performance data.
ADDITION 19 Sept. 2019:
One comment asks whether this is worth doing in javascript. I ran the code in JSPerf and it gives interesting results.
if the array has an odd number of elements (one figure to find), sorting is 20% slower that this "fast median" proposition.
if there is an even number of elements, the "fast" algorithm is 40% slower, because it filters through the data twice, to find elements number k and k+1 to average. It is possible to write a version of fast median that doesn't do this.
The test used rather small arrays (29 elements in the jsperf test). The effect appears to be more pronounced as arrays get larger. A more general point to make is: it shows these kinds of optimisations are worth doing in Javascript. An awful lot of computation is done in JS, including with large amounts of data (think of dashboards, spreadsheets, data visualisations), and in systems with limited resources (think of mobile and embedded computing).
var arr = {
max: function(array) {
return Math.max.apply(null, array);
},
min: function(array) {
return Math.min.apply(null, array);
},
range: function(array) {
return arr.max(array) - arr.min(array);
},
midrange: function(array) {
return arr.range(array) / 2;
},
sum: function(array) {
var num = 0;
for (var i = 0, l = array.length; i < l; i++) num += array[i];
return num;
},
mean: function(array) {
return arr.sum(array) / array.length;
},
median: function(array) {
array.sort(function(a, b) {
return a - b;
});
var mid = array.length / 2;
return mid % 1 ? array[mid - 0.5] : (array[mid - 1] + array[mid]) / 2;
},
modes: function(array) {
if (!array.length) return [];
var modeMap = {},
maxCount = 1,
modes = [array[0]];
array.forEach(function(val) {
if (!modeMap[val]) modeMap[val] = 1;
else modeMap[val]++;
if (modeMap[val] > maxCount) {
modes = [val];
maxCount = modeMap[val];
}
else if (modeMap[val] === maxCount) {
modes.push(val);
maxCount = modeMap[val];
}
});
return modes;
},
variance: function(array) {
var mean = arr.mean(array);
return arr.mean(array.map(function(num) {
return Math.pow(num - mean, 2);
}));
},
standardDeviation: function(array) {
return Math.sqrt(arr.variance(array));
},
meanAbsoluteDeviation: function(array) {
var mean = arr.mean(array);
return arr.mean(array.map(function(num) {
return Math.abs(num - mean);
}));
},
zScores: function(array) {
var mean = arr.mean(array);
var standardDeviation = arr.standardDeviation(array);
return array.map(function(num) {
return (num - mean) / standardDeviation;
});
}
};
2022 TypeScript Approach
const median = (arr: number[]): number | undefined => {
if (!arr.length) return undefined;
const s = [...arr].sort((a, b) => a - b);
const mid = Math.floor(s.length / 2);
return s.length % 2 === 0 ? ((s[mid - 1] + s[mid]) / 2) : s[mid];
};
Notes:
The type in the function signature (number[]) ensures only an array of numbers can be passed to the function. It could possibly be empty though.
if (!arr.length) return undefined; checks for the possible empty array, which would not have a median.
[...arr] creates a copy of the passed-in array to ensure we don't overwrite the original.
.sort((a, b) => a - b) sorts the array of numbers in ascending order.
Math.floor(s.length / 2) finds the index of the middle element if the array has odd length, or the element just to the right of the middle if the array has even length.
s.length % 2 === 0 determines whether the array has an even length.
(s[mid - 1] + s[mid]) / 2 averages the two middle items of the array if the array's length is even.
s[mid] is the middle item of an odd-length array.
TypeScript Answer 2020:
// Calculate Median
const calculateMedian = (array: Array<number>) => {
// Check If Data Exists
if (array.length >= 1) {
// Sort Array
array = array.sort((a: number, b: number) => {
return a - b;
});
// Array Length: Even
if (array.length % 2 === 0) {
// Average Of Two Middle Numbers
return (array[(array.length / 2) - 1] + array[array.length / 2]) / 2;
}
// Array Length: Odd
else {
// Middle Number
return array[(array.length - 1) / 2];
}
}
else {
// Error
console.error('Error: Empty Array (calculateMedian)');
}
};
const median = (arr) => {
return arr.slice().sort((a, b) => a - b)[Math.floor(arr.length / 2)];
};
Short and sweet.
Array.prototype.median = function () {
return this.slice().sort((a, b) => a - b)[Math.floor(this.length / 2)];
};
Usage
[4, 5, 7, 1, 33].median()
Works with strings as well
["a","a","b","b","c","d","e"].median()
For better performance in terms of time complexity, use MaxHeap - MinHeap to find the median of stream of array.
Simpler & more efficient
const median = dataSet => {
if (dataSet.length === 1) return dataSet[0]
const sorted = ([ ...dataSet ]).sort()
const ceil = Math.ceil(sorted.length / 2)
const floor = Math.floor(sorted.length / 2)
if (ceil === floor) return sorted[floor]
return ((sorted[ceil] + sorted[floor]) / 2)
}
Simple solution:
function calcMedian(array) {
const {
length
} = array;
if (length < 1)
return 0;
//sort array asc
array.sort((a, b) => a - b);
if (length % 2) {
//length of array is odd
return array[(length + 1) / 2 - 1];
} else {
//length of array is even
return 0.5 * [(array[length / 2 - 1] + array[length / 2])];
}
}
console.log(2, calcMedian([1, 2, 2, 5, 6]));
console.log(3.5, calcMedian([1, 2, 2, 5, 6, 7]));
console.log(9, calcMedian([13, 9, 8, 15, 7]));
console.log(3.5, calcMedian([1, 4, 6, 3]));
console.log(5, calcMedian([5, 1, 11, 2, 8]));
Simpler, more efficient, and easy to read
cloned the data to avoid alterations to the original data.
sort the list of values.
get the middle point.
get the median from the list.
return the median.
function getMedian(data) {
const values = [...data];
const v = values.sort( (a, b) => a - b);
const mid = Math.floor( v.length / 2);
const median = (v.length % 2 !== 0) ? v[mid] : (v[mid - 1] + v[mid]) / 2;
return median;
}
const medianArr = (x) => {
let sortedx = x.sort((a,b)=> a-b);
let halfIndex = Math.floor(sortedx.length/2);
return (sortedx.length%2) ? (sortedx[Math.floor(sortedx.length/2)]) : ((sortedx[halfIndex-1]+sortedx[halfIndex])/2)
}
console.log(medianArr([1,2,3,4,5]));
console.log(medianArr([1,2,3,4,5,6]));
function Median(arr){
let len = arr.length;
arr = arr.sort();
let result = 0;
let mid = Math.floor(len/2);
if(len % 2 !== 0){
result += arr[mid];
}
if(len % 2 === 0){
result += (arr[mid] + arr[mid+1])/2
}
return result;
}
console.log(`The median is ${Median([0,1,2,3,4,5,6])}`)
function median(arr) {
let n = arr.length;
let med = Math.floor(n/2);
if(n % 2 != 0){
return arr[med];
} else{
return (arr[med -1] + arr[med])/ 2.0
}
}
console.log(median[1,2,3,4,5,6]);
The arr.sort() method sorts the elements of an array in place and returns the array. By default, it sorts the elements alphabetically, so if the array contains numbers, they will not be sorted in numerical order.
On the other hand, the arr.sort((a, b) => a - b) method uses a callback function to specify how the array should be sorted. The callback function compares the two elements a and b and returns a negative number if a should be sorted before b, a positive number if b should be sorted before a, and zero if the elements are equal. In this case, the callback function subtracts b from a, which results in a sorting order that is numerical in ascending order.
So, if you want to sort an array of numbers in ascending order, you should use arr.sort((a, b) => a - b), whereas if you want to sort an array of strings alphabetically, you can use arr.sort():
function median(numbers) {
const sorted = Array.from(numbers).sort((a, b) => a - b);
const middle = Math.floor(sorted.length / 2);
if (sorted.length % 2 === 0) {
return (sorted[middle - 1] + sorted[middle]) / 2;
}
return sorted[middle];
}
function findMedian(arr) {
arr.sort((a, b) => a - b)
let i = Math.floor(arr.length / 2)
return arr[i]
}
let result = findMedian([0, 1, 2, 4, 6, 5, 3])
console.log(result)
const arr = [5,6,0,7,8];
const sum = (arr,num) => arr.reduce((total)=>(num==0 ? total : total+num), 0)
console.log(sum(arr, 0))
Please check how can I make it work. Did some mistake but don't know what exactly. Output is a function instead of a result.
This is awkward to do in .reduce because it goes through the entire array. If we do a naive implementation you can see the problem:
const arr = [5,6,0,7,8];
const sum = (arr,num) => arr.reduce((total, x)=>(num==x ? total : total+x), 0)
console.log(sum(arr, 0))
We now make the check correctly - num==x will return true when x is zero (the value of num). However, the result is wrong because this only returns true once but any other iteration it's still true. And here is the same thing with more logging that describes each step of the process:
const arr = [5,6,0,7,8];
const sum = (arr,num) => arr.reduce((total, x)=> {
const boolCheck = num==x;
const result = boolCheck ? total : total+x;
console.log(
`total: ${total}
num: ${num}
x: ${x}
boolCheck: ${boolCheck}
result: ${result}`);
return result;
}, 0)
console.log(sum(arr, 0))
So, you need to add some flag that persists between iterations, so it doesn't get lost.
One option is to have an external flag that you change within the reduce callback:
const arr = [5,6,0,7,8];
const sum = (arr,num) => {
let finished = false;
return arr.reduce((total, x) => {
if(x === num)
finished = true;
return finished ? total : total+x;
}, 0)
}
console.log(sum(arr, 0))
Alternatively, you can have that flag internal to the reduce callback and pass it around between calls. It works the same way in the end but makes the callback function pure. At the cost of some unorthodox construct:
const arr = [5,6,0,7,8];
const sum = (arr,num) => {
return arr.reduce(({total, finished}, x) => {
if(x === num)
finished = true;
total = finished ? total : total+x;
return {total, finished};
}, {total: 0, finished: false})
.total
}
console.log(sum(arr, 0))
If you want to use reduce but you're OK with using other methods, then you can use Array#indexOf to find the first instance of a value and Array#slice the array that contains any value up to the target value:
const arr = [5,6,0,7,8];
const sum = (arr,num) => {
const endIndex = arr.indexOf(num);
return arr.slice(0, endIndex)
.reduce((total, x)=> total+x, 0)
}
console.log(sum(arr, 0))
Or in as one chained expression:
const arr = [5,6,0,7,8];
const sum = (arr,num) => arr
.slice(0, arr.indexOf(num))
.reduce((total, x)=> total+x, 0);
console.log(sum(arr, 0))
Other libraries may have a takeUntil or takeWhile operation which is even closer to what you want - it gets you an array from the beginning up to a given value or condition. You can then reduce the result of that.
Here is an example of this using Lodash#takeWhile
By using chaining here, Lodash will do lazy evaluation, so it will only go through the array once, instead of scanning once to find the end index and going through the array again to sum it.
const arr = [5,6,0,7,8];
const sum = (arr,num) => _(arr)
.takeWhile(x => x !== num)
.reduce((total, x)=>total+x, 0)
console.log(sum(arr, 0))
<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/lodash#4.17.15/lodash.min.js"></script>
As a note, if you are using Lodash, then you may as well use _.sum(). I didn't above just to illustrate how a generic takeUntil/takeWhile looks.
const arr = [5, 6, 0, 7, 8];
const sum = (arr, num) => _(arr)
.takeWhile(x => x !== num)
.sum()
console.log(sum(arr, 0))
<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/lodash#4.17.15/lodash.min.js"></script>
Since you need to stop summing values part way through the array, this might be most simply implemented using a for loop:
const arr = [5, 6, 0, 7, 8];
const num = 0;
let sum = 0;
for (let i = 0; i < arr.length; i++) {
if (arr[i] == num) break;
sum += arr[i];
}
console.log(sum);
If you want to use reduce, you need to keep a flag that says whether you have seen the num value so you can stop adding values from the array:
const arr = [5, 6, 0, 7, 8];
const sum = (arr, num) => {
let seen = false;
return arr.reduce((c, v) => {
if (seen || v == num) {
seen = true;
return c;
}
return c + v;
}, 0);
}
console.log(sum(arr, 0));
console.log(sum(arr, 8));
call it as follows:
console.log(sum(arr, 0)());
You need parenthesis to execute the function ()
sum(arr, 0)
Without parenthesis you store a reference to the function in the variable
I have this code that pairs same elements in an array, with the expectation that the array will have an odd length and it should return the only element that couldn't get a pair. So I wrote the code just well, and it works fine for smaller arrays, but with very large big integers of over 1 billion, the time complexity became O(N**2) and then the need to refactor my code to get a much better performance for large arrays and large array elements. Here is my code below;
function solution(A) {
if(!Array.isArray(A)) return 0;
var temp = new Array(A.length);
var position = 0;
for(let i=0; i<A.length; i++){
if(temp.includes(A[i])){
position = temp.indexOf(A[i]);
index = A.indexOf(A[i]);
delete temp[position];
delete A[index];
delete A[i];
}else{
temp[i] = A[i];
}
}
for(let j=0; j<A.length; j++){
if(A[j] !== undefined) return A[j];
else continue;
}
}
To test it, source data can look like [2,3,6,7,3,5,5,6,2] and it will give an output of 7. But when the array is so large up to [1,2,....] with length n = n=999,999, or n = 5000,000,000, the time complexity increases exponentially.
You might use Object to store non-paired elements only.
Please note that you don't need to store all the array elements and their counts in the Object and then filter by count (like #StepUp does).
Everything's been done in a single loop.
The function returns Array of all non-paired elements:
const solution = A => Array.isArray(A) ?
Object.keys(
A.reduce((r, k) => {
r[k] = r[k] || 0;
if (++r[k] > 1) delete r[k];
return r;
}, {})
) : [];
console.log(solution([2, 3, 6, 7, 3, 5, 5, 6, 2]))
We can try to find odd occurrences for one iteration by using great features of object. Object is key - value pair. So access to object key is O(1). So when we meet the same element, then we just increment value:
const hashMap = arr.reduce((a, c)=> {
a[c] = a[c] || 0;
a[c] += 1;
return a;
},{})
const result = Object.keys(hashMap).filter(key => hashMap[key] === 1);
An example:
let arr = [2, 3, 6, 7, 3, 5, 5, 6, 2];
const hashMap = arr.reduce((a, c)=> {
a[c] = a[c] || 0;
a[c] += 1;
return a;
},{})
const result = Object.keys(hashMap).filter(key => hashMap[key] === 1);
console.log(result);
My two 100% JavaScript solutions with optimized time complexity. The first one is using Set:
function solution(A) {
const pairs = new Set();
for (const num of A) {
if (pairs.has(num)) {
pairs.delete(num);
} else {
pairs.add(num);
}
}
const [unpaired] = pairs;
return unpaired;
}
The second one is using bitwise XOR:
function solution(A) {
let unpaired;
for (const num of A) {
unpaired ^= num;
}
return unpaired;
}
I need to write a program that, when given a list of integers, it finds all 2-pairs of integers that have the same product. i.e. a 2-pair is 2 distinct pairs of integers lets say [(a,b),(c,d)] where a*b = c*d but a ≠ b ≠ c ≠ d.
The range of integers should be from 1 to 1024. What I would like to implement is that when the web page is opened the user is prompted by a pop up in which he will enter the array of integers, i.e [1,2,3,7,8,9,6] etc for instance from the input [1,2,3,7,8,9,6] the output should be [(9,2),(3,6)] since both evaluate to 18.
The coding I did so far is very basic and can be seen below. What I've done so far is the pop-up box alert the input etc, but can't seem to understand how to make the program check for the pairs and give the sum. Thanks in advance to this community who's helping me out to better understand and learn javascript!
I've done my fair bit of research below, definitely different question than mine but have gone through them.
Find a pair of elements from an array whose sum equals a given number
https://www.w3resource.com/javascript-exercises/javascript-array-exercise-26.php
Code:
function evaluate() {
const input = prompt("Please enter the array of integers in the form: 1,2,3,1")
.split(',')
.map(item => item.trim());
function pairs(items) {
}
if (input == "" || input == null) {
document.writeln("Sorry, there is nothing that can be calculated.");
} else {
document.writeln("Your calculation is: ");
document.writeln(pairs(input) + " with a starting input string of: " + input);
}
}
evaluate()
You could iterate the array and a copy of the array beginning by the actual index plus one for getting the products. Store the result in an object with product as key.
Then get the keys (products) of the object, filter it to get only the results with two or more products.
var array = [1, 2, 3, 7, 8, 9, 6],
result = {},
pairs;
array.forEach(function (a, i) {
array.slice(i + 1).forEach(function (b) {
(result[a * b] = (result[a * b] || [])).push([a, b]);
});
});
pairs = Object
.keys(result)
.filter(function (k) { return result[k].length >= 2; })
.map(function(k) { return result[k]; });
console.log(pairs);
We could mutate the equation:
a * b = c * d | : b
a = c * d : b
So actually we just need to get all different combinations of three numbers (b, c, d) and check if the result (a) is also in the given range:
while(true){
// shuffle
const [b, c, d] = items;
const a = c * d / b;
if(items.includes(a + ""))
return true;
}
return false;
Now you only need to shuffle the array to go through all different combinations. You can find an algorithm here
Assuming that you are given an array such as [1,2,3,7,8,9,6] and a value 18 and you need to find pairs that multiply to 18 then, use the following approach
Convert them to a map - O(n)
var inputArr = [1,2,3,7,8,9,6];
var map = inputArr.reduce( (acc, c) => {
acc[ c ] = true; //set any truthy value
return acc;
},{});
Iterate an inputArr and see if its compliment is available in the map - O(n)
var output = [];
var mulValue = 18;
inputArr.forEach( s => {
var remainder = mulValue/s;
if ( map[s] && map[remainder] )
{
output.push( [ s, remainder ] );
map[s] = false;
map[remainder] = false;
}
});
Demo
var inputArr = [1, 2, 3, 7, 8, 9, 6];
var map = inputArr.reduce((acc, c) => {
acc[c] = true; //set any truthy value
return acc;
}, {});
var output = [];
var mulValue = 18;
inputArr.forEach(s => {
var remainder = mulValue / s;
if (map[s] && map[remainder]) {
output.push([s, remainder]);
map[s] = false;
map[remainder] = false;
}
});
console.log(output);
You can try something like this:
Idea:
Loop over the array to compute product. Use this iterator(say i) as get first operand(say op1).
Now again loop over same array but the range will start from i+1. This is to reduce number of iteration.
Now create a temp variable that will hold product and operand.
On every iteration, add value to product in hashMap.
Now loop over hashMap and remove any value that has length that is less than 2.
function sameProductValues(arr) {
var hashMap = {};
for (var i = 0; i < arr.length - 1; i++) {
for (var j = i + 1; j < arr.length; j++) {
var product = arr[i] * arr[j];
hashMap[product] = hashMap[product] || [];
hashMap[product].push([arr[i], arr[j]]);
}
}
for(var key in hashMap) {
if( hashMap[key].length < 2 ) {
delete hashMap[key];
}
}
console.log(hashMap)
}
sameProductValues([1, 2, 3, 7, 8, 9, 6])
For example, if I had "scissors" in variable and wanted to know the position of all occurrences of the letter "s", it should print out 1, 4, 5, 8.
How can I do this in JavaScript in most efficient way? I don't think looping through the whole is terribly efficient
A simple loop works well:
var str = "scissors";
var indices = [];
for(var i=0; i<str.length;i++) {
if (str[i] === "s") indices.push(i);
}
Now, you indicate that you want 1,4,5,8. This will give you 0, 3, 4, 7 since indexes are zero-based. So you could add one:
if (str[i] === "s") indices.push(i+1);
and now it will give you your expected result.
A fiddle can be see here.
I don't think looping through the whole is terribly efficient
As far as performance goes, I don't think this is something that you need to be gravely worried about until you start hitting problems.
Here is a jsPerf test comparing various answers. In Safari 5.1, the IndexOf performs the best. In Chrome 19, the for loop is the fastest.
Using the native String.prototype.indexOf method to most efficiently find each offset.
function locations(substring,string){
var a=[],i=-1;
while((i=string.indexOf(substring,i+1)) >= 0) a.push(i);
return a;
}
console.log(locations("s","scissors"));
//-> [0, 3, 4, 7]
This is a micro-optimization, however. For a simple and terse loop that will be fast enough:
// Produces the indices in reverse order; throw on a .reverse() if you want
for (var a=[],i=str.length;i--;) if (str[i]=="s") a.push(i);
In fact, a native loop is faster on chrome that using indexOf!
When i benchmarked everything it seemed like regular expressions performed the best, so i came up with this
function indexesOf(string, regex) {
var match,
indexes = {};
regex = new RegExp(regex);
while (match = regex.exec(string)) {
if (!indexes[match[0]]) indexes[match[0]] = [];
indexes[match[0]].push(match.index);
}
return indexes;
}
you can do this
indexesOf('ssssss', /s/g);
which would return
{s: [0,1,2,3,4,5]}
i needed a very fast way to match multiple characters against large amounts of text so for example you could do this
indexesOf('dddddssssss', /s|d/g);
and you would get this
{d:[0,1,2,3,4], s:[5,6,7,8,9,10]}
this way you can get all the indexes of your matches in one go
function charPos(str, char) {
return str
.split("")
.map(function (c, i) { if (c == char) return i; })
.filter(function (v) { return v >= 0; });
}
charPos("scissors", "s"); // [0, 3, 4, 7]
Note that JavaScript counts from 0. Add +1 to i, if you must.
In modern browsers matchAll do the job :
const string = "scissors";
const matches = [...string.matchAll(/s/g)];
You can get the values in several ways. For example :
const indexes = matches.map(match => match.index);
More functional fun, and also more general: This finds the starting indexes of a substring of any length in a string
const length = (x) => x.length
const sum = (a, b) => a+b
const indexesOf = (substr) => ({
in: (str) => (
str
.split(substr)
.slice(0, -1)
.map(length)
.map((_, i, lengths) => (
lengths
.slice(0, i+1)
.reduce(sum, i*substr.length)
))
)
});
console.log(indexesOf('s').in('scissors')); // [0,3,4,7]
console.log(indexesOf('and').in('a and b and c')); // [2,8]
indices = (c, s) => s
.split('')
.reduce((a, e, i) => e === c ? a.concat(i) : a, []);
indices('?', 'a?g??'); // [1, 3, 4]
Here is a short solution using a function expression (with ES6 arrow functions). The function accepts a string and the character to find as parameters. It splits the string into an array of characters and uses a reduce function to accumulate and return the matching indices as an array.
const findIndices = (str, char) =>
str.split('').reduce((indices, letter, index) => {
letter === char && indices.push(index);
return indices;
}, [])
Testing:
findIndices("Hello There!", "e");
// → [1, 8, 10]
findIndices("Looking for new letters!", "o");
// → [1, 2, 9]
Here is a compact (one-line) version:
const findIndices = (str, char) => str.split('').reduce( (indices, letter, index) => { letter === char && indices.push(index); return indices }, [] );
using while loop
let indices = [];
let array = "scissors".split('');
let element = 's';
let idx = array.indexOf(element);
while (idx !== -1) {
indices.push(idx+1);
idx = array.indexOf(element, idx + 1);
}
console.log(indices);
Another alternative could be using flatMap.
var getIndices = (s, t) => {
return [...s].flatMap((char, i) => (char === t ? i + 1 : []));
};
console.log(getIndices('scissors', 's'));
console.log(getIndices('kaios', '0'));
I loved the question and thought to write my answer by using the reduce() method defined on arrays.
function getIndices(text, delimiter='.') {
let indices = [];
let combined;
text.split(delimiter)
.slice(0, -1)
.reduce((a, b) => {
if(a == '') {
combined = a + b;
} else {
combined = a + delimiter + b;
}
indices.push(combined.length);
return combined; // Uncommenting this will lead to syntactical errors
}, '');
return indices;
}
let indices = getIndices(`Ab+Cd+Pk+Djb+Nice+One`, '+');
let indices2 = getIndices(`Program.can.be.done.in.2.ways`); // Here default delimiter will be taken as `.`
console.log(indices); // [ 2, 5, 8, 12, 17 ]
console.log(indices2); // [ 7, 11, 14, 19, 22, 24 ]
// To get output as expected (comma separated)
console.log(`${indices}`); // 2,5,8,12,17
console.log(`${indices2}`); // 7,11,14,19,22,24
Just for further solution, here is my solution:
you can find character's indexes which exist in a string:
findIndex(str, char) {
const strLength = str.length;
const indexes = [];
let newStr = str;
while (newStr && newStr.indexOf(char) > -1) {
indexes.push(newStr.indexOf(char) + strLength- newStr.length);
newStr = newStr.substring(newStr.indexOf(char) + 1);
}
return indexes;
}
findIndex('scissors', 's'); // [0, 3, 4, 7]
findIndex('Find "s" in this sentence', 's'); // [6, 15, 17]
function countClaps(str) {
const re = new RegExp(/C/g);
// matching the pattern
const count = str.match(re).length;
return count;
}
//countClaps();
console.log(countClaps("CCClaClClap!Clap!ClClClap!"));
Using recursion function:
let indcies=[];
function findAllIndecies(str,substr,indexToStart=0) {
if (indexToStart<str.length) {
var index= str.indexOf(substr,indexToStart)
indcies.push(index)
findAllIndecies(str,substr,index+1)
}
}
findAllIndecies("scissors","s")
You could probably use the match() function of javascript as well. You can create a regular expression and then pass it as a parameter to the match().
stringName.match(/s/g);
This should return you an array of all the occurrence of the the letter 's'.