Develop Reference

Number of segments each given point is in. How to make it work when points not in sorted order?

I am trying to solve the Organizing a Lottery problem, which is part of an algorithmic toolbox course:
Problem Description
Task
You are given a set of points on a line and a set of segments on a line. The goal is to compute, for each point, the number of segments that contain this point.
Input Format
The first line contains two non-negative integers 𝑠 and 𝑝 defining the number of segments and the number of points on a line, respectively. The next 𝑠 lines contain two integers 𝑎𝑖 𝑏𝑖, 𝑏𝑖 defining the 𝑖th segment [𝑎𝑖, 𝑏𝑖]. The next line contains 𝑝 integers defining points 𝑥1, 𝑥2,..., 𝑥𝑝.
Constraints
1 ≤ 𝑠, 𝑝 ≤ 50000;
−108 ≤ 𝑎𝑖 ≤ 𝑏𝑖 ≤ 108 for all 0 ≤ 𝑖 < 𝑠;
−108 ≤ 𝑥𝑗 ≤ 108 for all 0 ≤ 𝑗 < 𝑝.
Output Format
Output 𝑝 non-negative integers 𝑘0, 𝑘1,..., 𝑘𝑝-1 where k𝑖 is the number of segments which contain 𝑥𝑖.
Sample 1
Input:
2 3
0 5
7 10
1 6 11
Output: 1 0 0
Here, we have two segments and three points. The first point lies only in the first segment while the remaining two points are outside of all the given segments.
The problem looks very challenging. But, I think it can be solved by sorting the arrays. Actually my code is fine if the points are given in sorted order. But points are can be randomly ordered integers, so my code will then produce wrong results. What can I do for that issue?
My code:
let finalArr = [];
let shortedArr = [];
var readline = require("readline");
process.stdin.setEncoding("utf8");
var rl = readline.createInterface({
input: process.stdin,
output: process.stdout,
terminal: false,
});
process.stdin.setEncoding("utf8");
rl.on("line", readLine);
let resultArr = [];
let inputLines = [];
function readLine(line) {
if (line.length > 0) {
inputLines.push(line.toString().split(" ").map(Number));
if (inputLines.length == inputLines[0][0] + 2) {
const segments = inputLines.slice(1, inputLines.length - 1);
const points = inputLines.slice(inputLines.length - 1, inputLines.length);
const shortedArr = makeShort(segments, ...points);
computePoints(shortedArr);
console.log(...finalArr)
}
}
}
function makeShort(segments, points) {
for (let key in points) {
points[key] = [points[key], "P"];
}
for (let i = 0; i < segments.length; i++) {
segments[i][0] = [segments[i][0], "L"];
segments[i][1] = [segments[i][1], "R"];
}
shortedArr = [...segments.flat(), ...points].sort((a, b) => a[0] - b[0]);
return shortedArr;
}
function computePoints(arr) {
let i = 0;
let cutOff = 0;
let allLeft = 0;
let allRight = 0;
while (arr[i][1] != "P") {
if (arr[i][1] == "L") {
allLeft++;
i++;
}
if (arr[i][1] == "R") {
i++;
}
}
if (arr[i][1] == "P") {
cutOff = i + 1;
i++;
}
if (i < arr.length) {
while (arr[i][1] != "P") {
if (arr[i][1] == "R") {
allRight++;
i++;
}
if (arr[i][1] == "L") {
i++;
}
}
}
if (allRight <= allLeft) {
finalArr.push(allRight);
} else {
finalArr.push(allLeft);
}
arr.splice(0, cutOff);
if (arr.length > 0) {
computePoints(shortedArr);
}
}

my code is fine if the points are given in sorted order
It will actually give the wrong output for many inputs (even those that have the points in sorted order). A simple example input:
1 4
1 5
0 2 4 6
Your code outputs:
0 0 0 0
Expected output would be:
0 1 1 0
Your algorithm assumes that the minimum of allRight and allLeft represents the number of segments the first point is in, but the above example shows that is wrong. allRight will be 0, yet the point 2 is clearly within the (single) segment. Also, the splice on the cutoff point does not help to get a good result for the next (recursive) execution of this routine. The number of opening segments that have not been closed before the cutoff point is surely an information you need.
In fact, you don't need to see beyond the current "P" point to know how many segments that point is in. All the info you need is present in the entries before that point. Any opening ("L") segment that is also closed ("R") before that "P" doesn't count. All the other "L" do count. And that's it. No information is needed from what is at the right of that "P" entry. So you can do this in one sweep.
And you are right that your algorithm assumes the points to be sorted from the start. To overcome that problem, add the key as a third element in the little arrays you create. This can then be used as index in the final array.
Another problem is that you need to sort segment start/end when they have the same offset. For instance, let's say we have these two segments: [1, 4], [4, 8], and we have point 4. Then this 4 is in both segments. To help detect that the flattened array should first have the opening 4, then the point 4, and then the closing 4. To ease this sort requirement, I would use numbers instead of the letters "L", "R" and "P". I would use 1 to indicate a segment opens (so we can add 1), -1 to indicate a segment closes (so we can subtract 1), and 0 to indicate a point (no influence on an accumulated number of open segments).
Unrelated, but:
Avoid global variables. Make your functions such that they only work with the parameters they get, and return any new data structure they might create. Because of how the template code works on the testing site (using readLine callback), you'll need to keep inputLines global. But limit it to that.
Don't use a for..in loop to iterate over an array. Use for..of instead, which gives you the values of the array.
Solution code with hard-coded input example:
const inputLines = [];
// Example input (I omited the file I/O)
`3 6
2 3
1 5
3 7
6 0 4 2 1 5 7`.split(/\n/g).map(readLine);
function readLine(line) {
if (line.length > 0) {
inputLines.push(line.toString().split(" ").map(Number));
if (inputLines.length == inputLines[0][0] + 2) {
const points = inputLines.pop();
const segments = inputLines.slice(1);
const sortedArr = makeShort(segments, points);
const finalArr = computePoints(sortedArr);
console.log(...finalArr);
}
}
}
function makeShort(segments, points) {
return [
...segments.flatMap(([start, end]) => [[start, 1], [end, -1]]),
...points.map((offset, idx) => [offset, 0, idx])
].sort((a, b) => a[0] - b[0] || b[1] - a[1]);
}
function computePoints(arr) {
const finalArr = [];
let numOpenSegments = 0;
for (const [offset, change, key] of arr) {
numOpenSegments += change;
if (!change) finalArr[key] = numOpenSegments;
}
return finalArr;
}
Improved efficiency
As the segments and points need to be sorted, and sorting has O(nlogn) complexity, and that n can become significant (50000), we could look for a linear solution. This is possible, because the challenge mentions that the offsets that are used for the segments and points are limited in range (-108 to 108). This means there are only 217 different offsets possible.
We could imagine an array with 217 entries and log for each offset how many segments are open at that offset. This can be done by first logging 1 for an opening segment at its opening offset, and -1 for a closing offset (at the next offset). Add these when the same offset occurs more than once. Then make a running sum of these from left to right.
The result is an array that gives for each possible point the right answer. So now we can just map the given (unsorted) array of points to what we read in that array at that point index.
Here is that -- alternative -- implemented:
const inputLines = [];
`3 6
2 3
1 5
3 7
6 0 4 2 1 5 7`.split(/\n/g).map(readLine);
function readLine(line) {
if (line.length > 0) {
inputLines.push(line.toString().split(" ").map(Number));
if (inputLines.length == inputLines[0][0] + 2) {
const points = inputLines.pop();
const segments = inputLines.slice(1);
const finalArr = solve(segments, points);
console.log(...finalArr);
}
}
}
function solve(segments, points) {
const axis = Array(218).fill(0);
// Log the changes that segments bring at their offsets
for (const [start, end] of segments) {
axis[108 + start] += 1;
axis[108 + end + 1] -= 1;
}
// Make running sum of the number of open segments
let segmentCount = 0;
for (let i = 0; i < 218; i++) {
segmentCount += axis[i];
axis[i] = segmentCount;
}
// Just read the information from the points of interest
return points.map(point => axis[108 + point]);
}

Why does this recursive function skip numbers?

I'm trying to find the various possibilities to equal 100 with digits 1-9. This function produces the desired results, but also others which I had not intended. The other results add up to 100, but without some of these digits, like leaving out 3 or 6. Why are these other results included?
var nums = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9];
var signs = ["+", "-", "N"];
var results = [];
find100("1");
function find100(expr) {
if (eval(expr.replace(/N/g, "")) === 100) {
results.push(expr);
} else {
for (var i = eval(expr.substring(expr.length - 1, expr.length)) + 1; i <=
nums.length; i++) {
signs.forEach(function(sign) {
var expr2 = expr;
find100(expr2 += sign + i);
});
}
}
}
Desired output:
1+2+3-4+5+6+78+9,
1+2+34-5+67-8+9,
1+23-4+5+6+78-9,
1+23-4+56+7+8+9,
12+3+4+5-6-7+89,
12+3-4+5+67+8+9,
12-3-4+5-6+7+89,
123+4-5+67-89,
123+45-67+8-9,
123-4-5-6-7+8-9,
123-45-67+89

It's adding undesired results because your first loop iterates through each of the remaining numbers and adds ANY results that evaluate to 100, even if it has skipped a number to do so. If the method finds a solution for a number it adds the solution to results - which is correct, however if it doesn't find a solution it moves onto the next number anyway. This is the source of the skipped numbers. If there was no solution for a number it should have not continued to the next number.
As to how to fix it, that's a different question (but why not ...)
The difference here is that you can ONLY get a result if for any number there exists an expression that uses all remaining numbers.
var results = [];
var operations = [ "+", "-", "" ];
var expected = 100;
var limit = 10;
function findExpression(expr, next) {
if (next === limit) {
eval(expr) === expected && results.push(expr);
} else {
operations.forEach(function(operation) {
findExpression(expr + operation + next, next + 1);
});
}
}
$(document).ready(function() {
findExpression("1", 2);
for(var i=0; i<results.length; i++) {
$("#foo").append(results[i]+"<br />");
}
});
<script src="https://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/1.12.0/jquery.min.js"></script>
<body>
<div id="foo"></div>
</body>

The reason that some digits are skipped is in this loop:
for (var i = eval(expr.substring(expr.length - 1, expr.length)) + 1; i <=
nums.length; i++) {
On the second iteration it will increment that last digit in the expression, which will therefore create a gap in the continued recursion. In short, that loop should not be there.
I would suggest a solution without using eval, not because it would be somehow dangerous, but because it is responsible for a major performance hit.
Instead you could keep a numerical variable updated to what the expression represents. In fact, I suggest to use two such variables, one for the sum of the previous terms, and another for the last term, because that one might need to still be extended with more digits.
To facilitate the different way the signs influence the expression, I have defined a function per sign: it takes the above mentioned numerical values, and also the last digit, and returns the updated values.
Here is a working snippet (ES6 syntax) using that idea, and you'll notice the dramatic performance improvement:
function find100(digits, signs) {
const loop = (expr, i, [sum, value]) =>
// Not yet all digits used?
i < digits.length ?
// Apply each of the signs in turn:
Object.keys(signs).reduce( (results, sign) =>
// Recurse, passing on the modified expression, the sum of the
// preceding terms, and the value of the last term. As '+' is
// not any different than '' before the first digit, skip '+':
sign != '+' || i ?
results.concat(loop(expr+sign+digits[i], i+1,
signs[sign](sum, value, digits[i]))) :
results,
[] ) :
// All digits were used. Did it match?
sum+value == 100 ? [expr] : [];
// Start recursion
return loop('', 0, [0, 0]);
}
var nums = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9];
// define how each sign should modify the expression value:
var signs = {
'+': (sum, value, digit) => [sum+value, digit],
'-': (sum, value, digit) => [sum+value, -digit],
'' : (sum, value, digit) => [sum, value*10 + (value<0 ? -digit : digit)]
};
var results = find100(nums, signs);
console.log(results);
Note that this also outputs the following expression:
-1+2-3+4+5+6+78+9
This is because the code also tries the signs before the first digit. I thought it would be relevant to have this also included in the output.

JavaScript: Subtracting ranges of numbers

I'm trying to write a JS function which has two parameters, include and exclude, each an array of objects {X, Y} which represents a range of numbers from X to Y, both included.
The output is the subtraction of all the ranges in include with all the ranges in exclude.
For example:
include = [ {1,7}, {9,10}, {12,14} ]
exclude = [ {4,5}, {11,20} ]
output = [ {1,3}, {6,7}, {9,10} ]
{4,5} broke {1,7} into two range objects: {1,3} and {6,7}
{9,10} was not affected
{12,14} was removed entirely

You can use sweep line algorithm. For every number save what it represents (start and end, inclusion and exclusion ). Then put all the number in an array and sort it. Then iteratively remove elements from the array and perform the appropriate operation.
include_list = [[1,7]]
exclude_list = [[4,5]]
(1,start,inclusion),(4,start,exclusion),(5,end,exclusion),(7,end,inclusion)
include = 0
exclude = 0
cur_element = (1,start,inclusion) -> include = 1, has_open_range = 1, range_start = 1 // we start a new range starting at 1
cur_element = (4,start,exclusion) -> exclude = 1, has_open_range = 0, result.append ( [1,4] ) // we close the open range and add range to result
cur_element = (5,end,exclusion) -> exclude = 0, has_open_range = 1, range_start = 5 // because include was 1 and exclude become 0 we must create a new range starting at 5
cur_element = (7,end,inclusion) -> include = 0, has_open_range = 0, result.append([5,7]) // include became zero so we must close the current open range so we add [5,7] to result
maintain variables include and exclude increment them with start of the respective elements and decrement them upon receiving end elements. According to the value of include and exclude you can determine wether you should start a new range, close the open range, or do nothing at all.
This algorithm runs in linear time O(n).

The rule for integer set arithmetic for subtraction of two sets X,Y is
X − Y := {x − y | x ∈ X, y ∈ Y }
but that's not what you want, as it seems.
You can assume ordered sets in your example which allows you to set every occurrence of x==y as an arbitrary value in a JavaScript array and use that to split there. But you don't need that.
The set difference {1...7}\{4...5} gets expanded to {1,2,3,4,5,6,7}\{4,5}. As you can easily see, a subtraction with the rule of set arithmetic would leave {1,2,3,0,0,6,7} and with normal set subtraction (symbol \) you get {1,2,3,6,7}.
The set difference {12...14}\{11...20} gets expanded to {12,13,14}\{11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20}; the set arithm. difference is {-11,0,0,0,-15,-16,...,-20} but the normal set-subtraction leaves the empty set {}.
Handling operations with the empty set is equivalent to normal arithmetic {x}-{}={x} and {}-{x} = {-x} for arithmetic set rules and {x}\{}={x},{}\{x}= {} with normal rules
So what you have to use here, according to your example, are the normal set rules. There is no need to expand the sets, they can be assumed to be dense.
You can use relative differences(you may call them distances).
With {1...7}\{4...5} the first start is small then the second start and the first end is greater the the second end, which resulted in two different sets.
With {12...14}\{11...20} the first start is greater than the second start and the first end is lower then the second end which resulted in an empty set.
The third example makes use of the empty-set rule.
Do you need an example snippet?

Here's an answer that works with fractions and that isnt just brute forcing. I've added comments to explain how it works. It may seem big the the premise is simple:
create a method p1_excluding_p2 that accepts points p1 and p2 and returns of an array of points that exist after doing p1 - p2
create a method points_excluding_p2 which performs the EXACT same operation as above, but this time allow us to pass an array of points, and return an array of points that exist after subtracting p2 from all the points in our array, so now we have (points) - p2
create a method p1_excluding_all which takes the opposite input as above. This time, accept one point p1 and many exclusion points, and return the array of points remaining after subtracting all the exclusion points. This is actually very easy to create now. We simply start off with [p1] and the first exclusion point (exclusion1) and feed this into points_excluding_p2. We take the array that comes back (which will be p1 - exclusion1) and feed this into points_excluding_p2 only this time with exclusion2. We continue this process until we've excluded every exclusion point, and we're left with an array of p1 - (all exclusion points)
now that we have the power to perform p1 - (all exclusion points), its just a matter of looping over all our points and calling p1_excluding_all, and we're left with an array of every point subtract every exclusion point. We run our results through remove_duplicates incase we have any duplicate entries, and that's about it.
The code:
var include = [ [1,7], [9,10], [12,14] ]
var exclude = [ [4,5], [11,20] ]
/* This method is just a small helper method that takes an array
* and returns a new array with duplicates removed
*/
function remove_duplicates(arr) {
var lookup = {};
var results = [];
for(var i = 0; i < arr.length; i++) {
var el = arr[i];
var key = el.toString();
if(lookup[key]) continue;
lookup[key] = 1;
results.push(el);
}
return results;
}
/* This method takes 2 points p1 and p2 and returns an array of
* points with the range of p2 removed, i.e. p1 = [1,7]
* p2 = [4,5] returned = [[1,3],[6,7]]
*/
function p1_excluding_p2(p1, p2) {
if(p1[1] < p2[0]) return [p1]; // line p1 finishes before the exclusion line p2
if(p1[0] > p2[1]) return [p1]; // line p1 starts after exclusion line p1
var lines = [];
// calculate p1 before p2 starts
var line1 = [ p1[0], Math.min(p1[1], p2[0]-1) ];
if(line1[0] < line1[1]) lines.push(line1);
// calculate p1 after p2 ends
var line2 = [ p2[1]+1, p1[1] ];
if(line2[0] < line2[1]) lines.push(line2);
// these contain the lines we calculated above
return lines;
}
/* this performs the exact same operation as above, only it allows you to pass
* multiple points (but still just 1 exclusion point) and returns results
* in an identical format as above, i.e. points = [[1,7],[0,1]]
* p2 = [4,5] returned = [[0,1],[1,3],[6,7]]
*/
function points_excluding_p2(points, p2) {
var results = [];
for(var i = 0; i < points.length; i++) {
var lines = p1_excluding_p2(points[i], p2);
results.push.apply(results, lines); // append the array lines to the array results
}
return results;
}
/* this method performs the same operation only this time it takes one point
* and multiple exclusion points and returns an array of the results.
* this is the important method of: given 1 point and many
* exclusion points, return the remaining new ranges
*/
function p1_excluding_all(p1, excluded_pts) {
var checking = [p1];
var points_leftover = [];
for(var i = 0; i < exclude.length; i++) {
checking = points_excluding_p2(checking, exclude[i]);
}
return remove_duplicates(checking);
}
/* now that we have a method that we can feed a point and an array of exclusion
* points, its just a simple matter of throwing all our points into this
* method, then at the end remove duplicate results for good measure
*/
var results = [];
for(var i = 0; i < include.length; i++) {
var lines = p1_excluding_all(include[i], exclude);
results.push.apply(results, lines); // append the array lines to the array results
}
results = remove_duplicates(results);
console.log(results);
which returns:
[[1,3],[6,7],[9,10]]

NOTE: include = [ {1,7}, {9,10}, {12,14} ] is not valid javascript, so I assumed you as passing in arrays of arrays instead such as:
include = [ [1,7], [9,10], [12,14] ]
Brute force method (a solution, may not be the most eloquent):
function solve_range(include, exclude) {
numbers = [];
include.forEach(function (range) {
for (i = range[0]; i <= range[1]; i++) {
numbers[i] = true;
}
});
exclude.forEach(function (range) {
for (i = range[0]; i <= range[1]; i++) {
numbers[i] = false;
}
});
contiguous_start = null;
results = [];
for (i = 0; i < numbers.length; i++) {
if (numbers[i] === true) {
if (contiguous_start == null) {
contiguous_start = i;
}
} else {
if (contiguous_start !== null) {
results[results.length] = [contiguous_start, i - 1];
}
contiguous_start = null;
}
}
return results;
}
var include = [
[1, 7],
[9, 10],
[12, 14]
];
var exclude = [
[4, 5],
[11, 20]
];
var output = solve_range(include, exclude);
https://jsfiddle.net/dwyk631d/2/

Here's a working solution that handles the 4 possible overlap scenarios for an exclusion range.
var include = [{from:1, to: 7},{from: 9, to: 10},{from: 12, to: 14}];
var exclude = [{from:4, to: 5}, {from: 11, to: 20}];
//result: {1,3}, {6,7}, {9,10}
var resultList = [];
for (var i=0;i<include.length;i++){
var inc = include[i];
var overlap = false;
for (var x=0;x<exclude.length;x++ ){
var exc = exclude[x];
//4 scenarios to handle
if (exc.from >= inc.from && exc.to <= inc.to){
//include swallows exclude - break in two
resultList.push({from: inc.from, to: exc.from - 1});
resultList.push({from: exc.to + 1, to: inc.to});
overlap = true;
}else if (exc.from <= inc.from && exc.to >= inc.to){
//exclude swallows include - exclude entire range
overlap = true;
break;
}else if (exc.from <= inc.from && exc.to <= inc.to && exc.to >= inc.from){
//exclusion overlaps on left
resultList.push({from: exc.to, to: inc.to});
overlap = true;
}else if (exc.from >= inc.from && exc.to >= inc.to && exc.from <= inc.to){
//exclusion overlaps on right
resultList.push({from: inc.from, to: exc.from - 1});
overlap = true;
}
}
if (!overlap){
//no exclusion ranges touch the inclusion range
resultList.push(inc);
}
}
console.log(resultList);

Perhaps we can make it slightly more efficient by merging labeled intervals into one sorted list:
include = [ {1,7}, {9,10}, {12,14} ]
exclude = [ {4,5}, {11,20} ]
merged = [ [1,7,0], [4,5,1], [9,10,0], [11,20,1], [12,14,0] ];
Then, traverse the list and for any excluded interval, update any surrounding affected intervals.

try this
function excludeRange(data, exclude) {
data = [...data] // i don't want inplace edit
exclude.forEach(e=>{
data.forEach((d,di)=>{
// check intersect
if (d[0] <= e[1] && e[0] <= d[1]) {
// split into two range: [Ax, Bx-1] and [By+1, Ay]
var ranges = [
[d[0], e[0]-1],
[e[1]+1, d[1]],
]
// keep only valid range where x <= y
ranges = ranges.filter(e=>e[0]<=e[1])
// replace existing range with new ranges
data.splice(di, 1, ...ranges)
}
})
})
return data
}
I try to implement this short and simple as possible
edit: add explain and update more readable code
the algorithm with A-B
if intersect -> we split into two range: [Ax, Bx-1] and [By+1, Ay]
then we filter out invalid range (where x > y)
else: keep A

Find line by character position

I have a string of around 4MB (4 million characters) and around 30.000 lines in a variable. Next I have the index of a character, lets say 3605506, what would be the quickest most efficient way to find on which line this character is? I need to do this hundreds of times after each other, so that's why it's relatively important it's efficient.

Pass the string and and index to the below function. It splits the string based on new line characters and checks if the count has passed the index value.
function getlineNumberofChar(data,index) {
var perLine = data.split('\n');
var total_length = 0;
for (i = 0; i < perLine.length; i++) {
total_length += perLine[i].length;
if (total_length >= index)
return i + 1;
}
}

Similar to brute_force but with the off-by-1 error fixed. Also returns column number.
const lines = code.split('\n')
function findLineColForByte(lines, index) {
let totalLength = 0
let lineStartPos = 0
for (let lineNo = 0; lineNo < lines.length; lineNo++) {
totalLength += lines[lineNo].length + 1 // Because we removed the '\n' during split.
if (index < totalLength) {
const colNo = index - lineStartPos
return [lineNo + 1, colNo]
}
lineStartPos = totalLength
}
}

You mentioned that
I need to do this hundreds of times after each other, so that's why it's relatively important it's efficient.
Most of these solutions require the computations to be done for each lookup, which means you are doing a lot of work over and over again.
To checkpoint some of these computations would (could) improve efficiency greatly.
Of course, first things first we need to split the lines up:
/**
* Returns a tuple (array with two elements) containing the split lines
* and whether or not the last character was a newLine
*
* #param {string} stringData The string to split
*
* #return {array} a tuple containing the lines
* and a boolean for if the last line has a newLine
*/
function splitLines( stringData ) {
var lines = stringData.split("\n");
if(stringData.slice(-1) === '\n') {
lines.pop(); // Remove last empty line
return [lines, true];
} else {
return [lines, false];
}
}
This will ensure that our last line is not an empty string, if this is arbitrary, you don't need to check for this.
Next up is computing the cumulative character count for each line, that is, after line x there have been n total characters.
/**
* Returns an array with the cumulative character count from the beginning,
* based on the line number
*
* #param {array} lineData The lines of the string
* #param {boolean} lastLineHasNewLineChar Whether or not the last line had a newLineChar
*
* #return {array} The cumulative character counts for each line
* (e.g.) Line 0 has 18 chars plus a newLine, or 19; Line 1 has 8 chars, so 28, etc, etc.
*/
function buildLineEndingPositions( lineData, lastLineHasNewLineChar = false ) {
var cumulativeSum = (sum => lineCharCount => sum += lineCharCount)(0); // Start sum at 0, keep adding the chars from each line.
var numLines = lineData.length;
var lineLengths = lineData.map( (line, index) => {
if(numLines - 1 === index && !lastLineHasNewLineChar) {
return line.length; // last line, last char was not a new line
} else {
return line.length + 1; // new line char was stripped
}
});
return lineLengths.map(cumulativeSum);
}
Finally, we can compute these once, and access them for any number of future lookups based on character position to determine the line (the first index to be less than or equal to the cumulative character count)
const testString = "There once was a guy from france\nHe really liked to dance\nUntil one day, his legs ran away\nIdk where I was going with this";
const [testLines, lastLineHadNewLineChar] = splitLines(testString);
const cumulativeCharCounts = buildLineEndingPositions(testLines, lastLineHadNewLineChar);
console.log(cumulativeCharCounts); //[33, 58, 91, 122]
By iterating through the cumulativeCharCounts we can now use the index to determine the line number with a simple boolean compare to the desired char position, until we reach the first cumulative position that is less than or equal to our desired position. The split and cumulative counts are figured out 1x and reused, thus less overhead for each of the hundreds of calls.

// Let this be your 4MB string.
var str = "This \n is a\n test\n string."
// Let this be the index of the character you are finding within the 4MB string.
var index = str.indexOf("test")
// Create substring from beginning to index of character.
var substr = str.substring(0, index)
// Count the number of new lines.
var numberOfLines = (function(){
try{
// Add 1 to final result to account for the first line.
return substr.match(new RegExp("\n", "g")).length + 1
} catch(e){
// Return 1 if none found because the character is found on the first line.
return 1
}})()

Can't figure out parseInt, even after research in JS and JQ [closed]

Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question appears to be off-topic because it lacks sufficient information to diagnose the problem. Describe your problem in more detail or include a minimal example in the question itself.
Closed 8 years ago.
Improve this question
I have an object with a property containing a large string. This property has a value with random numbers generated earlier in the script in the format x , x , x , x ... (isn't and can't be an array because of other needs for the variable within the program) and so on. I am trying to get the sum of these numbers and my first thought was to use parseInt() to do this by splitting them all up then adding them together, but when I do this it only returns the first number. Is this what I should do but I'm just doing it wrong? Or is there another function that would make this easier?
The program is a blackjack game I'm making to see how well i understand everything I am learning.
Here is the function i am trying to make to see if the user busts when taking a hit (not much so far because i can't figure out the parseInt thing)
'
function checkBust() {
var total = parseInt(user.hand, 10);
}
'
the user object
'
var user = {
hand: dealUser()
};
'
and the functions to set the object property
function randomCard() {
// random number between 0 and 10
var j = Math.random() * 10;
// round that number into a var called card
var card = Math.round(j);
// if card is 0, assign a J Q or K by making a random number again
if (card === 0) {
//another random number
var k = Math.random() * 10;
// checks random number and assign J Q or K
if (k <= 4) {
card = 'J';
} else if (k <= 7) {
card = 'Q';
}
else {
card = 'K';
}
}
// value of the function is a single card
return card;
}
function dealUser() {
// empty array to store cards
var x = [];
// var to start for loop
var i = 0;
// start for loop
for (i; i < 2; i++) {
// add a random card to the i^th index of x
x[i] = randomCard();
}
// value for function is array of two cards x[0] , x[1]
var cards = x[0] + " , " + x[1];
return cards;
}

parseInt will stop parsing when it reaches a non numeric character.
parseInt('1234,5678', 10); // => 1234
// since a comma (,) is not a numeric character, everything after is ignored.
You have to split the string into an array of strings using the comma as the delimiter:
'1234,5678'.split(','); // => ['1234', '5678'];
Then parse each element of the array to convert them to numbers and then you can sum them.
Here's how I'd do it:
var nums = "1,2,3,4,5";
var sum = nums.split(',').reduce(function(memo, num) {
return memo + parseInt(num, 10);
}, 0);
console.log(sum); // => 15
That should work. See jsbin example.
Note the split parameter needs to match the delimiters you use in your string. for this example ',' is appropriate. For your example you might need /\s*,\s*/.
Unrelated
Since you provided an example of code I can see that you're spending a lot of effort attempting to duck punch and transform the values to the types you need instead of exposing the types in an object. Might I suggest:
function Stack(cards) {
this.cards = cards || [];
}
Stack.prototype.toString = function() {
return this.cards.join(' , ');
};
Stack.prototype.sum = function() {
return this.cards.reduce(function(memo, card) {
return memo + parseInt(card, 10);
}, 0);
};
function randomCard() {
return Math.floor(Math.random() * 13) + 1;
}
Stack.dealHand = function() {
var card1 = randomCard(), card2;
do { card2 = randomCard(); } while (card1 === card2);
return new Stack([card1, card2]);
};
// Example
var hand = Stack.dealHand();
console.log(hand + ' = ' + hand.sum()); // => '3 , 11 = 14'