I have range function and output functions they works correct,now I want create sum function for using as callbac function in range function,but when some function executed local variable let us say total or sum initialize 0(zero),how can solve this problem?
function range(start,end,callback,step) {
// body...
step=step || 1;
for(i=start;i<=end;i=i+step){
callback(i);
}
}
function output(a) {
// body...
console.log(a);
}
function sum(m){
var total=0;
// some code
}
range(1,5,output);
range(1,5,sum);
function range(start,end,callback,step) {
// body...
var aggregate;
step=step || 1;
for(i=start;i<=end;i=i+step){
aggregate = callback(i, aggregate);
}
}
function output(a) {
// body...
console.log(a);
}
function sum(m, aggregate){
return m + aggregate;
}
range(1,5,output);
range(1,5,sum);
This way you could even do cool stuff like
function conc(m, aggregate) {
return aggregate + m.toString();
}
range(1,5,conc,2); //prints 135
Continuition style code, like you've started it with range(), can get really weird and cumbersome.
And please, please, mind defining your local variables. like i
function range(start,end,callback,step) {
step=step || 1;
for(var i=start; i<=end; i=i+step)
callback(i);
}
function output(...label) {
return function(...args){
console.log(...label, ...args);
}
}
function sum(callback){
var total = 0;
return function(value){
//will log ever intermediate total, because sum() has no way to tell when the sequence is over.
callback(total += +value || 0);
}
}
range(1,5,output('range:'));
range(1,5,sum(output('sum:')));
In this case, I'd prefer using a generator instead, although the higher order functions get obsolete.
function *range(start,end,step) {
step = +step || (end < start? -1: 1);
for(var value = start, count = (end - start) / step; count-- >= 0; value += step)
yield value
}
function sum(iterator){
var total = 0, v;
for(v of iterator) total += +v || 0;
return total;
}
console.log("range:", ...range(1,5))
console.log("sum of range:", sum(range(1,5)))
//just to show that this works with your regular array as well
console.log("sum of array:", sum([1,2,3,4,5]));
//and some candy, as requested by Bergi ;)
//I like to stay with the interfaces as close as possible to the native ones
//in this case Array#reduce
var fold = (iterator, callback, start = undefined) => {
var initialized = start !== undefined,
acc = start,
index = 0,
value;
for(value of iterator){
acc = initialized?
callback(acc, value, index):
(initialized=true, value);
++index;
}
if(!initialized){
throw new TypeError("fold of empty sequence with no initial value");
}
return acc;
}
//and the ability to compose utility-functions
fold.map = (callback, start = undefined) => iterator => fold(iterator, callback, start);
console.log(" ");
var add = (a,b) => a + b; //a little helper
console.log('using fold:', fold(range(1,5), add, 0));
//a composed utility-function
var sum2 = fold.map(add, 0);
console.log('sum2:', sum2( range(1,5) ));
Clearly a range function should not take a callback but be a generator function in modern JavaScript, however you were asking how to write such a callback.
You've already tagged your questions with closures, and they are indeed the way to go here. By initialising a new total within each call of the outer function, you don't need to worry about how to reset a global counter.
function makeSum() {
var total=0;
return function(m) {
total += m;
return total; // so that we can access the result
}
}
var sum = makeSum();
range(1, 5, sum);
output(sum(0));
Won't simply calling the callback on the range array suffice if the callback is not undefined? Like this:
> function range(n, callback) {
const r = [...Array(n).keys()]
if (callback) {
return callback(r)
}
return r
}
> function sum(arr) {
return arr.reduce((a, b) => a + b, 0)
}
> range(10)
> [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9]
> range(10, sum)
> 45
Struggling to understand this code piece from Crockford's book, section 4.15:
var memoizer = function (memo, fundamental) {
var shell = function (n) {
var result = memo[n];
if (typeof result !== 'number') {
result = fundamental(shell, n);
memo[n] = result;
}
return result;
};
return shell;
};
var fibonacci = memoizer([0, 1], function (shell, n) {
return shell(n - 1) + shell(n - 2);
});
Question regarding the use of closures here: Once we call the function with an argument, say fibonacci(15), will the memo be available after the function finished executing, or is it just something that makes this particular recursive call more efficient? I.e. if after calling fibonacci(15) I later call fibonacci(16) will memo[15] be there?
Thanks for help.
Yes, it will still be there. The array was created when you called memoizer, and this will exist as long as your fibonacci number existed.
The only way this array would cease to exist is if the fibonacci function goes out of scope or is reassigned.
eg
var fibonacci = memoizer([0, 1], function (shell, n) {
return shell(n - 1) + shell(n - 2);
});
var n = fibonacci(15); // the array has grown
n = fibonacci(16); // This used the same array that fibonacci(15) set up
// Now lets lose it
fibonacci = memoizer([0, 1], function (shell, n) {
return shell(n - 1) + shell(n - 2);
});
// What the hell did you do that for?!? You just recreated the function
// with a new memo array!
n = fibonacci(17); // Had to recreate all of the previous fibonacci numbers again.
I am having trouble understanding how to return information to the first function from the second when there are multiple arguments. Now I know the following code works.
function One() {
var newVal = 0;
newVal = Too(newVal);
console.log(newVal);
}
function Too(arg) {
++arg;
return arg;
}
But what if I try to complicate things by adding arguments and a setinterval.
function One() {
var newVal = 0;
var z = 3;
var y = 3;
var x = 1;
newVal = Too(newVal);
var StopAI2 = setInterval(function () {
Too(x, y, z, newVal)
}, 100);
}
function Too(Xarg, Yarg, Zarg, newValarg) {
Xarg*Xarg;
Yarg*Yarg;
Zarg*Zarg;
++newValarg;
return newValarg;
}
I'm not sure what to do with the newVal = line of code. I only want to return the newVal not x,y,z.
This is what I think you're trying to ask:
How can I operate on the 4th argument to a function when only one argument is passed?
The answer to that question is this:
If you want to operate on the 4th argument of a function, at least 4 arguments must be passed to the function.
There are a few ways you can approach your problem differently.
#1
If there's one argument that is always necessary, make sure it's the first argument:
function Too(mandatoryArg, optionalArg1, optionalArg2) {
alert(++mandatoryArg);
if (optionalArg1) {
alert(++optionalArg1);
}
}
#2
Pass placeholder values for all the undefined or unknown arguments.
You might use null, undefined, or ''.
alert(Too(null, null, 4));
function Too(optArg1, optArg2, mandatoryArg) {
alert(++mandatoryArg);
}
#3
Make a decision based on the number of arguments:
function Too(optArg1, optArg2, optArg3) {
var numArgs = arguments.length;
if (numArgs === 1) {
alert(++optArg1);
}
if (numArgs === 3) {
alert(++optArg3);
}
}
EDIT
"Will this update a variable in the first function?"
Let's use an actual example that demonstrates something:
function one() {
var a = 0;
var b = 25;
var c = 50;
var d = -1;
d = two(a, b, c);
alert("a: " + a);
alert("b: " + b);
alert("c: " + c);
alert("d: " + d);
}
function two(a, b, c) {
++a;
++b;
++c;
if (arguments.length === 1) {
return a;
}
if (arguments.length === 3) {
return c;
}
}
Invoking one() will cause the following alerts:
a: 0
b: 25
c: 50
d: 51
Only the value of d is modified in function one().
That's because d is assigned the return value of two().
The changes to a, b, and c, inside two() have no effect on the values of a, b, and c inside one().
This would be the case even if the arguments for two() were named a, b, and c.
Here's a fiddle with the code above.
EDIT #2
Here is one way you could create functions that move a game object:
var FORWARD = 0;
var BACK = 1;
var LEFT = 2;
var RIGHT = 3;
// use an object with three values to represent a position
var pos = {
x: 0,
y: 0,
z: 0
};
pos = moveObject(pos, FORWARD);
printPosition(pos);
pos = moveObject(pos, LEFT);
printPosition(pos);
pos = moveObject(pos, FORWARD);
printPosition(pos);
pos = moveObject(pos, LEFT);
printPosition(pos);
// invoking moveObject() with one argument
// will move the object forward
pos = moveObject(pos);
printPosition(pos);
function moveObject(position, direction) {
// assume FORWARD if no direction is specified
if (typeof direction === 'undefined') {
direction = FORWARD;
}
if (direction === FORWARD) {
++position.z;
}
if (direction === BACK) {
--position.z;
}
if (direction === LEFT) {
--position.x;
}
if (direction === RIGHT) {
++position.x;
}
return position;
}
function printPosition(pos) {
alert(pos.x + ", " + pos.y + ", " + pos.z);
}
Here's a fiddle that shows a working demo of another approach.
There are two concepts that are at play here.
1 . Variable number of function parameters (or optional parameters).
If you are going to call the same function with different number of parameters (this will eventually lead to a world of headache), you need to determine (inside the function) how this function was called. You can use arguments object available inside each function:
function Too() {
if (arguments.length == 4) {
arguments[0]*arguments[0];
arguments[1]*arguments[1];
arguments[2]*arguments[2];
return ++arguments[3];
} else if (arguments.length == 1) {
return ++arguments[0];
} else {
// you decide what to do here
}
}
2 . Asynchronous code execution.
Realize that Too which is called when interval expires, executes well after One completes and returns. If you want Too to affect newVal variable, and somehow get at this new value afterwards, - make newVal variable global.
I want to make this syntax possible:
var a = add(2)(3); //5
based on what I read at http://dmitry.baranovskiy.com/post/31797647
I've got no clue how to make it possible.
You need add to be a function that takes an argument and returns a function that takes an argument that adds the argument to add and itself.
var add = function(x) {
return function(y) { return x + y; };
}
function add(x) {
return function(y) {
return x + y;
};
}
Ah, the beauty of JavaScript
This syntax is pretty neat as well
function add(x) {
return function(y) {
if (typeof y !== 'undefined') {
x = x + y;
return arguments.callee;
} else {
return x;
}
};
}
add(1)(2)(3)(); //6
add(1)(1)(1)(1)(1)(1)(); //6
It's about JS curring and a little strict with valueOf:
function add(n){
var addNext = function(x) {
return add(n + x);
};
addNext.valueOf = function() {
return n;
};
return addNext;
}
console.log(add(1)(2)(3)==6);//true
console.log(add(1)(2)(3)(4)==10);//true
It works like a charm with an unlimited adding chain!!
function add(x){
return function(y){
return x+y
}
}
First-class functions and closures do the job.
function add(n) {
sum = n;
const proxy = new Proxy(function a () {}, {
get (obj, key) {
return () => sum;
},
apply (receiver, ...args) {
sum += args[1][0];
return proxy;
},
});
return proxy
}
Works for everything and doesn't need the final () at the end of the function like some other solutions.
console.log(add(1)(2)(3)(10)); // 16
console.log(add(10)(10)); // 20
try this will help you in two ways add(2)(3) and add(2,3)
1.)
function add(a){ return function (b){return a+b;} }
add(2)(3) // 5
2.)
function add(a,b){
var ddd = function (b){return a+b;};
if(typeof b =='undefined'){
return ddd;
}else{
return ddd(b);
}
}
add(2)(3) // 5
add(2,3) // 5
ES6 syntax makes this nice and simple:
const add = (a, b) => a + b;
console.log(add(2, 5));
// output: 7
const add2 = a => b => a + b;
console.log(add2(2)(5));
// output: 7
Arrow functions undoubtedly make it pretty simple to get the required result:
const Sum = a => b => b ? Sum( a + b ) : a;
console.log(Sum(3)(4)(2)(5)()); //14
console.log(Sum(3)(4)(1)()); //8
This is a generalized solution which will solve add(2,3)(), add(2)(3)() or any combination like add(2,1,3)(1)(1)(2,3)(4)(4,1,1)(). Please note that few security checks are not done and it can be optimized further.
function add() {
var total = 0;
function sum(){
if( arguments.length ){
var arr = Array.prototype.slice.call(arguments).sort();
total = total + arrayAdder(arr);
return sum;
}
else{
return total;
}
}
if(arguments.length) {
var arr1 = Array.prototype.slice.call(arguments).sort();
var mytotal = arrayAdder(arr1);
return sum(mytotal);
}else{
return sum();
}
function arrayAdder(arr){
var x = 0;
for (var i = 0; i < arr.length; i++) {
x = x + arr[i];
};
return x;
}
}
add(2,3)(1)(1)(1,2,3)();
This will handle both
add(2,3) // 5
or
add(2)(3) // 5
This is an ES6 curry example...
const add = (a, b) => (b || b === 0) ? a + b : (b) => a + b;
This is concept of currying in JS.
Solution for your question is:
function add(a) {
return function(b) {
return a + b;
};
}
This can be also achieved using arrow function:
let add = a => b => a + b;
solution for add(1)(2)(5)(4)........(n)(); Using Recursion
function add(a) {
return function(b){
return b ? add(a + b) : a;
}
}
Using ES6 Arrow function Syntax:
let add = a => b => b ? add(a + b) : a;
in addition to what's already said, here's a solution with generic currying (based on http://github.com/sstephenson/prototype/blob/master/src/lang/function.js#L180)
Function.prototype.curry = function() {
if (!arguments.length) return this;
var __method = this, args = [].slice.call(arguments, 0);
return function() {
return __method.apply(this, [].concat(
[].slice.call(args, 0),
[].slice.call(arguments, 0)));
}
}
add = function(x) {
return (function (x, y) { return x + y }).curry(x)
}
console.log(add(2)(3))
Concept of CLOSURES can be used in this case.
The function "add" returns another function. The function being returned can access the variable in the parent scope (in this case variable a).
function add(a){
return function(b){
console.log(a + b);
}
}
add(2)(3);
Here is a link to understand closures http://www.w3schools.com/js/js_function_closures.asp
const add = a => b => b ? add(a+b) : a;
console.log(add(1)(2)(3)());
Or (`${a} ${b}`) for strings.
With ES6 spread ... operator and .reduce function. With that variant you will get chaining syntax but last call () is required here because function is always returned:
function add(...args) {
if (!args.length) return 0;
const result = args.reduce((accumulator, value) => accumulator + value, 0);
const sum = (...innerArgs) => {
if (innerArgs.length === 0) return result;
return add(...args, ...innerArgs);
};
return sum;
}
// it's just for fiddle output
document.getElementById('output').innerHTML = `
<br><br>add() === 0: ${add() === 0 ? 'true' : 'false, res=' + add()}
<br><br>add(1)(2)() === 3: ${add(1)(2)() === 3 ? 'true' : 'false, res=' + add(1)(2)()}
<br><br>add(1,2)() === 3: ${add(1,2)() === 3 ? 'true' : 'false, res=' + add(1,2)()}
<br><br>add(1)(1,1)() === 3: ${add(1)(1,1)() === 3 ? 'true' : 'false, res=' + add(1)(1,1)()}
<br><br>add(2,3)(1)(1)(1,2,3)() === 13: ${add(2,3)(1)(1)(1,2,3)() === 13 ? 'true' : 'false, res=' + add(2,3)(1)(1)(1,2,3)()}
`;
<div id='output'></div>
can try this also:
let sum = a => b => b ? sum(a + b) :a
console.log(sum(10)(20)(1)(32)()) //63
const sum = function (...a) {
const getSum = d => {
return d.reduce((i,j)=> i+j, 0);
};
a = getSum(a);
return function (...b) {
if (b.length) {
return sum(a + getSum(b));
}
return a;
}
};
console.log(sum(1)(2)(3)(4,5)(6)(8)())
function add(a, b){
return a && b ? a+b : function(c){return a+c;}
}
console.log(add(2, 3));
console.log(add(2)(3));
This question has motivated so many answers already that my "two pennies worth" will surely not spoil things.
I was amazed by the multitude of approaches and variations that I tried to put "my favourite" features, i. e. the ones that I would like to find in such a currying function together, using some ES6 notation:
const add=(...n)=>{
const vsum=(a,c)=>a+c;
n=n.reduce(vsum,0);
const fn=(...x)=>add(n+x.reduce(vsum,0));
fn.toString=()=>n;
return fn;
}
let w=add(2,1); // = 3
console.log(w()) // 3
console.log(w); // 3
console.log(w(6)(2,3)(4)); // 18
console.log(w(5,3)); // 11
console.log(add(2)-1); // 1
console.log(add()); // 0
console.log(add(5,7,9)(w)); // 24
.as-console-wrapper {max-height:100% !important; top:0%}
Basically, nothing in this recursively programmed function is new. But it does work with all possible combinations of arguments mentioned in any of the answers above and won't need an "empty arguments list" at the end.
You can use as many arguments in as many currying levels you want and the result will be another function that can be reused for the same purpose. I used a little "trick" to also get a numeric value "at the same time": I redefined the .toString() function of the inner function fn! This method will be called by Javascript whenever the function is used without an arguments list and "some value is expected". Technically it is a "hack" as it will not return a string but a number, but it will work in a way that is in most cases the "desired" way. Give it a spin!
Simple Recursion Solution for following use cases
add(); // 0
add(1)(2)(); //3
add(1)(2)(3)(); //6
function add(v1, sum = 0) {
if (!v1) return sum;
sum += v1
return (v2) => add(v2, sum);
}
function add() {
var sum = 0;
function add() {
for (var i=0; i<arguments.length; i++) {
sum += Number(arguments[i]);
}
return add;
}
add.valueOf = function valueOf(){
return parseInt(sum);
};
return add.apply(null,arguments);
}
// ...
console.log(add() + 0); // 0
console.log(add(1) + 0);/* // 1
console.log(add(1,2) + 0); // 3
function A(a){
return function B(b){
return a+b;
}
}
I found a nice explanation for this type of method. It is known as Syntax of Closures
please refer this link
Syntax of Closures
Simply we can write a function like this
function sum(x){
return function(y){
return function(z){
return x+y+z;
}
}
}
sum(2)(3)(4)//Output->9
Don't be complicated.
var add = (a)=>(b)=> b ? add(a+b) : a;
console.log(add(2)(3)()); // Output:5
it will work in the latest javascript (ES6), this is a recursion function.
Here we use concept of closure where all the functions called inside main function iter refer and udpate x as they have closure over it. no matter how long the loop goes , till last function , have access to x.
function iter(x){
return function innfunc(y){
//if y is not undefined
if(y){
//closure over ancestor's x
x = y+x;
return innfunc;
}
else{
//closure over ancestor's x
return x;
}
}
}
iter(2)(3)(4)() //9
iter(1)(3)(4)(5)() //13
let multi = (a)=>{
return (b)=>{
return (c)=>{
return a*b*c
}
}
}
multi (2)(3)(4) //24
let multi = (a)=> (b)=> (c)=> a*b*c;
multi (2)(3)(4) //24
we can do this work using closure.
function add(param1){
return function add1(param2){
return param2 = param1 + param2;
}
}
console.log(add(2)(3));//5
I came up with nice solution with closure, inner function have access to parent function's parameter access and store in its lexical scope, when ever we execute it, will get answer
const Sum = function (a) {
return function (b) {
return b ? Sum(a + b) : a;
}
};
Sum(1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6)(7)() // result is 28
Sum(3)(4)(5)() // result is 12
Sum(12)(10)(20) // result is 42
enter image description here
You should go in for currying to call the function in the above format.
Ideally, a function which adds two numbers will be like,
let sum = function(a, b) {
return a + b;
}
The same function can be transformed as,
let sum = function(a) {
return function(b) {
return a+b;
}
}
console.log(sum(2)(3));
Let us understand how this works.
When you invoke sum(2), it returns
function(b) {
return 2 + b;
}
when the returned function is further invoked with 3, b takes the value 3. The result 5 is returned.
More Detailed Explanation:
let sum = function(a) {
return function(b) {
return a + b;
}
}
let func1 = sum(2);
console.log(func1);
let func2 = func1(3)
console.log(func2);
//the same result can be obtained in a single line
let func3 = sum(2)(3);
console.log(func3);
//try comparing the three functions and you will get more clarity.
This is a short solution:
const add = a => b => {
if(!b) return a;
return add(a + b);
}
add(1)(2)(3)() // 6
add(1)(2)(3)(4)(5)() // 15