Develop Reference

Game of life bug

I'm coding Conways game of life in P5JS, but I got a wierd bug. It seems to "work" but it looks all wrong. I'm not sure if it has t do with finding the neighbors, because when I call the function manually, it works. I even copied a second neighbor-counting function of the internet in there, and it works, too.
Maybe it's a visual glitch, but I'm not sure of that either, because the code looks fine.
/// <reference path="../TSDef/p5.global-mode.d.ts" />
let gridSize = 10;
let arrCurrent = create2dArray(gridSize);
let arrNext = create2dArray(gridSize);
function setup() {
createCanvas(800, 800, WEBGL);
background(0);
stroke(0, 255, 0);
noFill();
initGame();
}
function draw() {
displayCells();
calcNextGen();
}
//Returns a 2D Array
function create2dArray(size) {
let newArray = new Array(size);
for (let i = 0; i < newArray.length; i++) {
newArray[i] = new Array(1);
}
return newArray;
}
//Fills initial array with random values
function initGame() {
for (let x = 0; x < arrCurrent.length; x++) {
for (let y = 0; y < arrCurrent.length; y++) {
arrCurrent[x][y] = Math.round((Math.random()));
}
}
}
//Calculates next generation
function calcNextGen() {
for (let x = 0; x < gridSize; x++) {
for (let y = 0; y < gridSize; y++) {
let neighbors = countNeighbors1(arrCurrent, x, y);
let state = arrCurrent[x][y];
//If cell is dead and has exactly 3 neighbors, it starts living
if (state === 0 && neighbors === 3) {
arrNext[x][y] = 1;
}
//If cell lives and has too few or too many neighbors, it dies
else if (state === 1 && (neighbors < 2 || neighbors > 3)) {
arrNext[x][y] = 0;
}
else {
arrNext[x][y] = state;
}
}
}
arrCurrent = arrNext.slice();
}
//Count neighbors
function countNeighbors(x, y) {
return arrCurrent[(x + 1) % gridSize][y] +
arrCurrent[x][(y + 1) % gridSize] +
arrCurrent[(x + gridSize - 1) % gridSize][y] +
arrCurrent[x][(y + gridSize - 1) % gridSize] +
arrCurrent[(x + 1) % gridSize][(y + 1) % gridSize] +
arrCurrent[(x + gridSize - 1) % gridSize][(y + 1) % gridSize] +
arrCurrent[(x + gridSize - 1) % gridSize][(y + gridSize - 1) % gridSize] +
arrCurrent[(x + 1) % gridSize][(y + gridSize - 1) % gridSize];
}
function countNeighbors1(grid, x, y) {
let sum = 0;
for (let i = -1; i < 2; i++) {
for (let j = -1; j < 2; j++) {
let col = (x + i + gridSize) % gridSize;
let row = (y + j + gridSize) % gridSize;
sum += grid[col][row];
}
}
sum -= grid[x][y];
return sum;
}
function displayCells() {
background(0);
translate(-300, -300, 0);
for (let x = 0; x < arrCurrent.length; x++) {
for (let y = 0; y < arrCurrent.length; y++) {
push();
translate(x * 50, y * 50, 0);
if (arrCurrent[x][y] === 1) box(50);
pop();
}
}
}
function logGrid() {
console.log(arrCurrent[0]);
console.log(arrCurrent[1]);
console.log(arrCurrent[2]);
console.log(arrCurrent[3]);
console.log(arrCurrent[4]);
console.log(arrCurrent[5]);
console.log(arrCurrent[6]);
console.log(arrCurrent[7]);
console.log(arrCurrent[8]);
console.log(arrCurrent[9]);
}
I know I'm very close, but I'm banging my head against this one since 2 hours.
Here's a little P5JS Web Editor, you can copy the code over and visually see the problem.
Any help is appreciated - thank you!

arrCurrent = arrNext.slice(); doesn't create a deep copy of the grid, it just creates a shallow copy of the first dimension.
It creates a grid, where columns of arrCurrent refers to the rows of arrNext.
You've to create a completely new grid:
arrCurrent = []
for (let x = 0; x < gridSize; x++)
arrCurrent.push(arrNext[x].slice());
let gridSize = 10;
let arrCurrent = create2dArray(gridSize);
let arrNext = create2dArray(gridSize);
function setup() {
createCanvas(800, 800, WEBGL);
background(0);
stroke(0, 255, 0);
noFill();
initGame();
frameRate(10)
}
function draw() {
displayCells();
calcNextGen();
}
//Returns a 2D Array
function create2dArray(size) {
let newArray = new Array(size);
for (let i = 0; i < newArray.length; i++) {
newArray[i] = new Array(1);
}
return newArray;
}
//Fills initial array with random values
function initGame() {
for (let x = 0; x < arrCurrent.length; x++) {
for (let y = 0; y < arrCurrent.length; y++) {
arrCurrent[x][y] = Math.round((Math.random()));
}
}
}
//Calculates next generation
// - A live cell dies if it has fewer than two live neighbors.
// - A live cell with two or three live neighbors lives on to the next generation.
// - A live cell with more than three live neighbors dies.
// - A dead cell will be brought back to live if it has exactly three live neighbors.
function calcNextGen() {
for (let x = 0; x < gridSize; x++) {
for (let y = 0; y < gridSize; y++) {
let neighbors = countNeighbors1(arrCurrent, x, y);
let state = arrCurrent[x][y];
//If cell is dead and has exactly 3 neighbors, it starts living
if (state === 0 && neighbors === 3) {
arrNext[x][y] = 1;
}
//If cell lives and has too few or too many neighbors, it dies
else if (state === 1 && (neighbors < 2 || neighbors > 3)) {
arrNext[x][y] = 0;
}
else {
arrNext[x][y] = state;
}
}
}
arrCurrent = []
for (let x = 0; x < gridSize; x++)
arrCurrent.push(arrNext[x].slice());
}
function countNeighbors1(grid, x, y) {
let sum = 0;
for (let i = -1; i < 2; i++) {
for (let j = -1; j < 2; j++) {
let col = (x + i + gridSize) % gridSize;
let row = (y + j + gridSize) % gridSize;
sum += grid[col][row];
}
}
sum -= grid[x][y];
return sum;
}
function displayCells() {
background(0);
translate(-75, -75, 0);
stroke(128);
box(50*gridSize, 50*gridSize, 50);
translate(-225, -225, 0);
stroke(0, 255, 0);
for (let x = 0; x < arrCurrent.length; x++) {
for (let y = 0; y < arrCurrent.length; y++) {
push();
translate(x * 50, y * 50, 0);
if (arrCurrent[x][y] === 1) box(50);
pop();
}
}
}
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/p5.js/0.9.0/p5.js"></script>

Making a canvas using p5.js

enter image description hereI got an exercise , where i have to create a rectangle-canvas using p5.js , but that canvas will consist small rects ,so i do it , but there is also 1 point in the exrecise . How can i get those small rects in 2 different colors , but 50% of those colores must be green and the other red , using matrix .
Here is the code .
var matrix = [
];
var ab = 36;
for (var y = 0; y < ab; y++) {
matrix.push([])
for (var x = 0; x < 36; x++) {
matrix[y][x] = Math.floor(Math.random() * 2)
}
}
console.log(matrix)
var side = 16;
function setup() {
createCanvas(matrix[0].length * side, matrix.length * side);
background('#acacac');
frameRate()
}
function draw() {
for (var y = 0; y < matrix.length; y++) {
for (var x = 0; x < matrix[y].length; x++) {
if (matrix[y][x] == 0) {
fill(0, 255, 0)
rect(y * side, x * side, side, side)
}
else if (matrix[y][x] == 1) {
fill("red")
rect(y * side, x * side, side, side)
}
function Shuffle (arguments) {
for(var k = 0; k < arguments.length; k++){
var i = arguments[k].length;
if ( i == 0 ) return false;
else{
while ( --i ) {
var j = Math.floor( Math.random() * ( i + 1 ) );
var tempi = arguments[k][i];
var tempj = arguments[k][j];
arguments[k][i] = tempj;
arguments[k][j] = tempi;
}
return arguments;
}
}
}

so as discussed in comments , the problem reduces to filling exactly half the matrix with one color and other half with other.
your matrix is in two dimension i will give a solution in one dimension, which should be quite easy to extend to 2-d
var count = 0;
var arr = [];
for( var i = 0 ;i < ab;i++){
arr[i] = 0;
}
while(true) {
var i = floor(random(ab));
if(arr[i] !==1) {
arr[i] = 1;
count++;
}
if(count === ab/2) break; // assume ab is even
}
there is one more way
fill half the array with 1 and half with 0 and then shuffle the array
you can very easily google algorithms for shuffling,
one pseudocode i could find
// after filling half elements with 1 and half with zero
// To shuffle an array a of n elements (indices 0..n-1):
for i from n - 1 downto 1 do
j = random integer with 0 <= j <= i
exchange a[j] and a[i]
source: https://www.geeksforgeeks.org/shuffle-a-given-array/

There it is my problem
var matrix = [
];
var ab = 36;
for (var y = 0; y < ab; y++) {
matrix.push([])
for(var x = 0 ; x<ab;x++){
matrix[y][x] = Math.floor(Math.random()*1)
}
for(var x = 0 ; x<ab/2;x++){
matrix[y][x] = 1
}
}
var count = 0;
var arr = [];
for( var i = 0 ;i < ab;i++){
arr[i] = 0;
}
while(true) {
var i = Math.floor(Random(ab));
if(arr[i] !==1) {
arr[i] = 1;
count++;
}
if(count === ab/2) break; // assume ab is even
}
console.log(arr)
var side = 16;
function setup() {
createCanvas(arr[0].length * side, arr.length * side);
background('#acacac');
frameRate()
}
function draw() {
for (var y = 0; y < arr.length; y++) {
for (var x = 0; x < arr[y].length; x++) {
if (matrix[y][x] == 0) {
fill(0, 255, 0)
rect(y * side, x * side, side, side)
}
else if (matrix[y][x] == 1) {
fill("red")
rect(y * side, x * side, side, side)
}
else if (matrix[y][x] == 2) {
fill(255, 255, 0)
rect(y * side, x * side, side, side)
}
else if (matrix[y][x] == 3) {
fill(255, 0, 0)
rect(y * side, x * side, side, side)
}
}
}
}

Adjusting the scope of the callback function of onclick

I'm trying to solve a programming exercise in which there are several bugs to be fixed. Ultimately, it is supposed to represent an animation with a grid of cells where at each time step, if a cell has exactly three neighbors which are alive (each cell has 8 neighbors), it 'comes to life', and if it has less than 2 or more than 3 neighbors, it 'dies' (where the neighbors 'wrap around' the grid). The initial script is as follows:
<html>
<head>
<script type="text/javascript">
var Board;
var xsize = 10;
var ysize = 10;
var dead = 0;
var alive = 1;
function Neighbors(Board, x, y)
{
var n = 0
for(dx=-1;dx < 1; ++dx)
for(dy=-1;dy < 1; ++dy)
{
var ax = x+dx;
var ay = y+dy;
if(Board[ax][ay]==alive) ++n;
}
return n;
}
function Kill(Board,x,y)
{
if(Board[x][y] == alive)
Board[x][y] = dead;
}
function MakeLive(Board,x,y)
{
if(Board[x][y] == dead)
Board[x][y] = alive;
}
function NextStep(Board)
{
for(var x = 0; x <= xsize; ++x)
{
for(var y = 0; y <= ysize; ++x)
{
n = Neighbors(Board,x,y);
if(n=3) MakeLive(Board,x,y);
if((n<2)||(n>3)) Kill(Board,x,y);
}
}
}
function DrawBoard(Board)
{
var Text = "";
for(var y = 0; y < ysize; ++y)
{
for(var x = 0; x < xsize; ++x)
Text += Board[x][y]==alive ? "o":"_";
Text += "<br/>";
}
document.getElementById("board").innerHTML = Text;
}
function Main()
{
// *** Change this variable to choose a different baord setup from below
var BoardSetup = "blinker";
Board = new Array(xsize);
for(var x = 0; x < xsize; ++x)
{
Board[x] = new Array(ysize);
for(var y = 0; y < ysize; ++y)
Board[x][y] = 0;
}
if(BoardSetup == "blinker")
{
Board[1][0] = 1;
Board[1][1] = 1;
Board[1][2] = 1;
}
else if(BoardSetup == "glider")
{
Board[2][0] = 1;
Board[2][1] = 1;
Board[2][2] = 1;
Board[1][2] = 1;
Board[0][1] = 1;
}
else if(BoardSetup == "flower")
{
Board[4][6] = 1;
Board[5][6] = 1;
Board[6][6] = 1;
Board[7][6] = 1;
Board[8][6] = 1;
Board[9][6] = 1;
Board[10][6] = 1;
Board[4][7] = 1;
Board[6][7] = 1;
Board[8][7] = 1;
Board[10][7] = 1;
Board[4][8] = 1;
Board[5][8] = 1;
Board[6][8] = 1;
Board[7][8] = 1;
Board[8][8] = 1;
Board[9][8] = 1;
Board[10][8] = 1;
}
DrawBoard(Board);
}
</script>
</head>
<body onload="Main()">
<div id="board">
</div>
Next ->
</body>
</html>
The problem is that if I press the 'Next' button, in the console I see the following error:
Uncaught TypeError: Cannot read property '-1' of undefined
at Neighbors (life_broken__281_29.html:19)
at Function.NextStep (life_broken__281_29.html:42)
at HTMLAnchorElement.onclick (life_broken__281_29.html:117)
Neighbors # life_broken__281_29.html:19
NextStep # life_broken__281_29.html:42
onclick # life_broken__281_29.html:117
The problem, I believe, is that the Board is defined in the Main() function, which is not in the scope of the onclick callback function.
My initial approach was to move the initialization of the Board outside of the Main() function, making it a global variable, and removing Board from all function calls. This does not seem like an elegant approach, however. Instead, I tried using Function.prototype.call() as follows:
Next ->
Further, I implemented a wrapAround function to avoid the indices going out of bounds:
function Neighbors(Board, x, y)
{
var n = 0
for(dx=-1;dx < 1; ++dx)
for(dy=-1;dy < 1; ++dy)
{
var ax = x+dx;
var ay = y+dy;
ax = wrapAround(ax, xsize);
ay = wrapAround(ay, ysize);
if(Board[ax][ay]==alive) ++n;
}
return n;
}
function wrapAround(coordinate, size) {
var result = coordinate % size;
if (result < 0) {
result += size;
}
return result;
}
However, now I get a new error:
life_broken__281_29.html:42 Uncaught TypeError: Cannot read property '0' of undefined
at MakeLive (life_broken__281_29.html:42)
at Function.NextStep (life_broken__281_29.html:53)
at HTMLAnchorElement.onclick (life_broken__281_29.html:127)
Apparently, the Neighbors function is now not raising any errors, but the next function in NextStep, MakeLive, is. This I don't understand however because they are both defined at the same 'level' and have similar invocations in NextStep. Can anyone explain what the issue is here?
Update
Indeed Board is declared in the global scope, so there was no need for Function.prototype.call(). (I'm used to Python where declaration and definition are always in the same place). I also changed the Boolean expression to (x === 3).
However, for some reason x is still going up to 10 even if I replace the <= by a <. Here is the updated code, with a console.log statement for debugging:
<html>
<head>
<script type="text/javascript">
var Board;
var xsize = 10;
var ysize = 10;
var dead = 0;
var alive = 1;
function Neighbors(Board, x, y)
{
var n = 0
for(dx=-1;dx < 1; ++dx)
for(dy=-1;dy < 1; ++dy)
{
var ax = x+dx;
var ay = y+dy;
ax = wrapAround(ax, xsize);
ay = wrapAround(ay, ysize);
if(Board[ax][ay]==alive) ++n;
}
return n;
}
function wrapAround(coordinate, size) {
var result = coordinate % size;
if (result < 0) {
result += size;
}
return result;
}
function Kill(Board, x, y)
{
if (Board[x][y] == alive)
Board[x][y] = dead;
}
function MakeLive(Board, x, y)
{
if (Board[x][y] == dead)
Board[x][y] = alive;
}
function NextStep(Board)
{
for(var x = 0; x < xsize; ++x)
{
for(var y = 0; y < ysize; ++x)
{
n = Neighbors(Board,x,y);
console.log("x = " + x + ", y = " + y + ", n = " + n);
if (n===3) MakeLive(Board,x,y);
if ((n<2)||(n>3)) Kill(Board,x,y);
}
}
}
function DrawBoard(Board)
{
var Text = "";
for(var y = 0; y < ysize; ++y)
{
for(var x = 0; x < xsize; ++x)
Text += Board[x][y]==alive ? "o":"_";
Text += "<br/>";
}
document.getElementById("board").innerHTML = Text;
}
function Main()
{
// *** Change this variable to choose a different baord setup from below
var BoardSetup = "blinker";
Board = new Array(xsize);
for(var x = 0; x < xsize; ++x)
{
Board[x] = new Array(ysize);
for(var y = 0; y < ysize; ++y)
Board[x][y] = 0;
}
if(BoardSetup == "blinker")
{
Board[1][0] = 1;
Board[1][1] = 1;
Board[1][2] = 1;
}
else if(BoardSetup == "glider")
{
Board[2][0] = 1;
Board[2][1] = 1;
Board[2][2] = 1;
Board[1][2] = 1;
Board[0][1] = 1;
}
else if(BoardSetup == "flower")
{
Board[4][6] = 1;
Board[5][6] = 1;
Board[6][6] = 1;
Board[7][6] = 1;
Board[8][6] = 1;
Board[9][6] = 1;
Board[10][6] = 1;
Board[4][7] = 1;
Board[6][7] = 1;
Board[8][7] = 1;
Board[10][7] = 1;
Board[4][8] = 1;
Board[5][8] = 1;
Board[6][8] = 1;
Board[7][8] = 1;
Board[8][8] = 1;
Board[9][8] = 1;
Board[10][8] = 1;
}
DrawBoard(Board);
}
</script>
</head>
<body onload="Main()">
<div id="board">
</div>
Next ->
</body>
</html>
and here is the result of the console when I click 'Next':
x = 0, y = 0, n = 0
life_broken__281_29.html:53 x = 1, y = 0, n = 1
life_broken__281_29.html:53 x = 2, y = 0, n = 0
life_broken__281_29.html:53 x = 3, y = 0, n = 0
life_broken__281_29.html:53 x = 4, y = 0, n = 0
life_broken__281_29.html:53 x = 5, y = 0, n = 0
life_broken__281_29.html:53 x = 6, y = 0, n = 0
life_broken__281_29.html:53 x = 7, y = 0, n = 0
life_broken__281_29.html:53 x = 8, y = 0, n = 0
life_broken__281_29.html:53 x = 9, y = 0, n = 0
life_broken__281_29.html:53 x = 10, y = 0, n = 0
life_broken__281_29.html:36 Uncaught TypeError: Cannot read property '0' of undefined
at Kill (life_broken__281_29.html:36)
at NextStep (life_broken__281_29.html:55)
at HTMLAnchorElement.onclick (life_broken__281_29.html:128)
I'm a bit nonplussed why this is happening because a simple for loop in this fashion does work:
for (var i = 0; i < 10; ++i) {
console.log("i = " + i);
}
VM158:2 i = 0
VM158:2 i = 1
VM158:2 i = 2
VM158:2 i = 3
VM158:2 i = 4
VM158:2 i = 5
VM158:2 i = 6
VM158:2 i = 7
VM158:2 i = 8
VM158:2 i = 9
undefined
Is the console somehow using a cached version of the old code? (I'm using the Live Preview in Brackets).
Update 2
This is because I should use a post-increment instead of a pre-increment (cf. http://jsforallof.us/2014/07/10/pre-increment-vs-post-increment/). Changing the ++x to x++ solved the problem.

The error has nothing to do with variable scope. Board is a global variable, so it's accessible to any function.
Your original problem was because you were accessing outside the Board array when x = 0 and dx = -1, and you fixed that with your wrapAround() function.
The next problem is that your loops in NextStep go too far. The row indexes go from 0 to xsize-1 and the columns go from 0 to ysize-1. But the loop there uses x <= xsize and y <= ysize, so it will try to access Board[xsize], which doesn't exist. Change those <= to <, just like the loop in Main().

if(n=3) MakeLive(Board,x,y);, your n = 3 should be n === 3, I'm sure you don't want to assign 3 to n which would cause a truthy value, which will call MakeLive(Board,x,y); every time.
Also, in NextStep you have your x and y go all the way up to xsize and ysize (<=) whereas everywhere else you use <, think that causes your undefined value in Board[x]

Pyramide of Stars Javascript

How could I create Pyramide of Stars that increase every row by 2 like that:
*
* * *
* * * * *
* * * * * * *
My currently code:
for (var x = 0; x < 5; x++) {
for (var y = 0; y <= x; y = y + 1) {
document.write(" * ");
}
document.write("<br>");
}

It's possible just to increment in your loop by 2.
for(var i = 1; i < 20; i += 2) {
console.log( Array(i).fill('*').join(' ') );
}
Otherwise just multiply inside your loop
for(var i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
console.log( Array(i*2 + 1).fill('*').join(' ') );
}
You may also need to polyfill Array.fill depending on your target.

Other answers recreate the entire row each time. This solution just extends the row each time to have another star.
function pyramid(n) {
let result = '', str = '', add = '*';
for (var i = 0; i < n; i++) {
str += add;
add = ' *';
if (!(i % 2)) result += str + '\n';
}
return result;
}
console.log(pyramid(5));

You can do like this.
function generate() {
var totalNumberofRows = 5;
var output="";
for (var i = 1; i <= totalNumberofRows; i++) {
for (var j = 1; j <= i; j++) {
if(j==1)
output+="*";
else
output+=" "+ "*" + " "+ "*";
}
console.log(output);
output="";
}
}
generate()

Hope so this is also beneficial for you....
$(document).ready(function () {
var NumberofRows = 5,arr;
for (var i = 1; i <= NumberofRows; i++) {
pyramid = [];
for (var j = 1; j <= i; j++) {
pyramid.push('*');
}
console.log(pyramid.join(" ") + "\n");
}
});
``

Generating alphanumerical sequence javascript

I have written a terribly slow function for generating codes that go from AA000 to ZZ999 (in sequence not random). And I have concluded that there has to be a better way to do this. Any suggestions on how to make this faster?
function generateAlphaNumeric(){
theAlphabet = ['A','B','C','D','E','F','G','H','I','J','K','L','M','N','O','P','Q','R','S','T','U','V','W','X','Y','Z'];
resultArrray = [];
resultArrray2 = [];
teller = 0;
for(i in theAlphabet){
for(x in theAlphabet){
resultArrray[teller] = theAlphabet[i] + theAlphabet[x];
teller++;
}
}
teller = 0;
for(x = 0; x<10; x++){
for(y = 0; y<10; y++){
for(z = 0; z<10; z++){
resultArrray2[teller] = x.toString() + y.toString() +z.toString();
teller++;
}
}
}
teller = 0;
finalArray = [];
for(index in resultArrray){
for(i in resultArrray2){
finalArray[teller] = resultArrray[index] + resultArrray2[i];
teller++;
}
}
//console.log(resultArrray);
//console.log(resultArrray2);
console.log(finalArray);
}

This should be considerably faster:
var theAlphabet = ['A','B','C','D','E','F','G','H','I','J','K','L','M','N','O',
'P','Q','R','S','T','U','V','W','X','Y','Z'];
var theDigits = ['0','1','2','3','4','5','6','7','8','9'];
var result = [];
for (var i=0 ; i<26 ; i++) {
var prefix1 = theAlphabet[i];
for (var j=0 ; j<26; j++) {
var prefix2 = prefix1 + theAlphabet[j];
for(var x = 0; x<10; x++){
var prefix3 = prefix2 + theDigits[x];
for(var y = 0; y<10; y++){
var prefix4 = prefix3 + theDigits[y];
for(var z = 0; z<10; z++){
result.push(prefix4 + theDigits[z]);
}
}
}
}
}
Key ideas:
Generate everything in one run
Reuse partial strings as much as possible
However, I don't see how such an exhaustive list is useful. There are exactly 26 * 26 * 1000 different codes. So instead of maintaining an array with all codes it could make sense to simply build a function that generates the specific code requested:
function getCode(number) {
var z = number % 10;
number -= z; number /= 10;
var y = number % 10;
number -= y; number /= 10;
var x = number % 10;
number -= x; number /= 10;
var a = number % 26;
number -= a; number /= 26;
var b = number;
return theAlphabet[a] + theAlphabet[b] + theDigits[x] + theDigits[y] + theDigits[z];
}

function generate() {
var str = 'ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ',
array = [];
for (var i = 0; i < str.length; i++) {
for (var j = 0; j < str.length; j++) {
for (var k = 0; k < 10; k++) {
for (var l = 0; l < 10; l++) {
for (var m = 0; m < 10; m++) {
ar.push(str[i] + str[j] + k + l + m);
}
}
}
}
}
return array;
}
console.log(generate());
This will generate a array of all the codes .. U can save that array and parse it easily using a loop.

Try this solution:
function generate() {
var str = 'ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ',
ar = [];
for (var index1 = 0; index1 < str.length; index1++) {
for (var index2 = 0; index2 < str.length; index2++) {
for (var index3 = 0; index3 < 1000; index3++) {
ar.push(str[index1] + str[index2] + ('000' + index3).slice(-3));
}
}
}
return ar;
}
console.log(generate());

I didn't test it, but it should do the trick
function generateAlphaNumeric()
{
var theAlphabet = ['A','B','C','D','E','F','G','H','I','J','K','L','M','N','O','P','Q','R','S','T','U','V','W','X','Y','Z'];
var result = [];
// Will take a random letter inside theAlphabet
// Math.floor(Math.random() * theAlphabet.length) will generate a random number between 0 and 25
var i = 0;
while(i<2)
{
var letter = theAlphabet[Math.floor(Math.random() * theAlphabet.length)];
result.push(letter);
i++;
}
i = 0;
while(i<3)
{
// Adds a random number between 0 and 9
result.push(Math.floor(Math.random() * 10));
i++;
}
return result;
}

From a computational complexity perspective, unfortunately this is the best you can do. From a sheer number of instructions perspective, you can do a bit better (as others have pointed out), but it's still going to be the same order of complexity (remember that constants / multipliers are irrelevant in big-O complexity). You can also optimize the storage a bit.
Think about it. Your array needs to have 26 * 26 * 10 * 10 * 10 members. This means you need to at least touch that many elements.
Let N = number of elements in the alphabet
Let M = number of elements in your digit queue
Best Case Order Complexity = O(N * N * M * M * M) (if all you had to do was assign values)
Best case storage complexity = same as above (you have to store all the codes)
Right now you are using the following operations:
for(i in theAlphabet){ // *O(N)*
for(x in theAlphabet){ // *O(N)*
resultArrray[teller] = theAlphabet[i] + theAlphabet[x];// *(O(1))*
}
}
for(x = 0; x<10; x++){ // O(M)
for(y = 0; y<10; y++){ // O(M)
for(z = 0; z<10; z++){ // O(M)
resultArrray2[teller] = x.toString() + y.toString() +z.toString(); // O(1) (technically this is O(length of x + y + z)
teller++;
}
}
}
for(index in resultArrray){ // O(N * N)
for(i in resultArrray2){ // O(M * M * M(
finalArray[teller] = resultArrray[index] + resultArrray2[i]; //O(1)
teller++;
}
}
So at the end of the day your order complexity is O(N * N * M * M * M), which is the best you can do.
The bigger question is why you want to generate all the codes at all. If all you want is to create a unique code per order number or something, you can make a state machine like:
function getNextCode(previousCode) {
// in here, just increment the previous code
}
If all you want is a random identifier, consider using a hash of the timestamp + something about the request instead.
If you don't care about uniqueness, you can always just generate a random code.
All of the above are O(1).