Develop Reference

Javascript: Object method - why do I need parentheses?

I am learning javascript and Ive stumbled upon issue that I do not understand. Could somebody explain to me why in method compareDNA I need to use parentheses while using this.dna and in the previous method it works just fine?
// Returns a random DNA base
const returnRandBase = () => {
const dnaBases = ['A', 'T', 'C', 'G'];
return dnaBases[Math.floor(Math.random() * 4)];
};
// Returns a random single stand of DNA containing 15 bases
const mockUpStrand = () => {
const newStrand = [];
for (let i = 0; i < 15; i++) {
newStrand.push(returnRandBase());
}
return newStrand;
};
function pAequorFactory(specimenNum, dna){
return {
specimenNum,
dna,
mutate(){
let i = Math.floor(Math.random() * 15)
let newGene = returnRandBase()
while (this.dna[i] === newGene){
newGene = returnRandBase()
}
this.dna[i] = newGene
return this.dna
},
compareDNA(object){
let counter = 0
for(let i = 0; i < this.dna().length; i++){
if(this.dna()[i] === object.dna()[i]){
counter++
}
}
let percentage = counter / this.dna().length * 100
return `Specimen number ${this.specimenNum} and specimen number ${object.specimenNum} have ${percentage}% of DNA in common.`
},
}
}
let aligator = pAequorFactory(1, mockUpStrand)
let dog = pAequorFactory(2, mockUpStrand)
console.log(aligator.compareDNA(dog))
console.log(dog.dna().length)

The problem is that the dna that is passed as an argument is a function, so it becomes a method of the returned object, and needs to be called with .dna(). However, this looks like a mistake - actually an array should have been passed:
let aligator = pAequorFactory(1, mockUpStrand())
// ^^
let dog = pAequorFactory(2, mockUpStrand())
// ^^
Then you can access .dna[i] or .dna.length as normal.
If you don't do that, dog.dna() returns a different DNA every time, which doesn't make sense.
using this.dna and in the previous method it works just fine?
Actually, it doesn't. dog.mutate() does return a function with a single integer property. It's supposed to return an array really.

How do I check if 2 numbers are the same from Math.random [duplicate]

Can't seem to find an answer to this, say I have this:
setInterval(function() {
m = Math.floor(Math.random()*7);
$('.foo:nth-of-type('+m+')').fadeIn(300);
}, 300);
How do I make it so that random number doesn't repeat itself. For example if the random number is 2, I don't want 2 to come out again.

There are a number of ways you could achieve this.
Solution A:
If the range of numbers isn't large (let's say less than 10), you could just keep track of the numbers you've already generated. Then if you generate a duplicate, discard it and generate another number.
Solution B:
Pre-generate the random numbers, store them into an array and then go through the array. You could accomplish this by taking the numbers 1,2,...,n and then shuffle them.
shuffle = function(o) {
for(var j, x, i = o.length; i; j = parseInt(Math.random() * i), x = o[--i], o[i] = o[j], o[j] = x);
return o;
};
var randorder = shuffle([0,1,2,3,4,5,6]);
var index = 0;
setInterval(function() {
$('.foo:nth-of-type('+(randorder[index++])+')').fadeIn(300);
}, 300);
Solution C:
Keep track of the numbers available in an array. Randomly pick a number. Remove number from said array.
var randnums = [0,1,2,3,4,5,6];
setInterval(function() {
var m = Math.floor(Math.random()*randnums.length);
$('.foo:nth-of-type('+(randnums[m])+')').fadeIn(300);
randnums = randnums.splice(m,1);
}, 300);

You seem to want a non-repeating random number from 0 to 6, so similar to tskuzzy's answer:
var getRand = (function() {
var nums = [0,1,2,3,4,5,6];
var current = [];
function rand(n) {
return (Math.random() * n)|0;
}
return function() {
if (!current.length) current = nums.slice();
return current.splice(rand(current.length), 1);
}
}());
It will return the numbers 0 to 6 in random order. When each has been drawn once, it will start again.

could you try that,
setInterval(function() {
m = Math.floor(Math.random()*7);
$('.foo:nth-of-type(' + m + ')').fadeIn(300);
}, 300);

I like Neal's answer although this is begging for some recursion. Here it is in java, you'll still get the general idea. Note that you'll hit an infinite loop if you pull out more numbers than MAX, I could have fixed that but left it as is for clarity.
edit: saw neal added a while loop so that works great.
public class RandCheck {
private List<Integer> numbers;
private Random rand;
private int MAX = 100;
public RandCheck(){
numbers = new ArrayList<Integer>();
rand = new Random();
}
public int getRandomNum(){
return getRandomNumRecursive(getRand());
}
private int getRandomNumRecursive(int num){
if(numbers.contains(num)){
return getRandomNumRecursive(getRand());
} else {
return num;
}
}
private int getRand(){
return rand.nextInt(MAX);
}
public static void main(String[] args){
RandCheck randCheck = new RandCheck();
for(int i = 0; i < 100; i++){
System.out.println(randCheck.getRandomNum());
}
}
}

Generally my approach is to make an array containing all of the possible values and to:
Pick a random number <= the size of the array
Remove the chosen element from the array
Repeat steps 1-2 until the array is empty
The resulting set of numbers will contain all of your indices without repetition.
Even better, maybe something like this:
var numArray = [0,1,2,3,4,5,6];
numArray.shuffle();
Then just go through the items because shuffle will have randomized them and pop them off one at a time.

Here's a simple fix, if a little rudimentary:
if(nextNum == lastNum){
if (nextNum == 0){nextNum = 7;}
else {nextNum = nextNum-1;}
}
If the next number is the same as the last simply minus 1 unless the number is 0 (zero) and set it to any other number within your set (I chose 7, the highest index).
I used this method within the cycle function because the only stipulation on selecting a number was that is musn't be the same as the last one.
Not the most elegant or technically gifted solution, but it works :)

Use sets. They were introduced to the specification in ES6. A set is a data structure that represents a collection of unique values, so it cannot include any duplicate values. I needed 6 random, non-repeatable numbers ranging from 1-49. I started with creating a longer set with around 30 digits (if the values repeat the set will have less elements), converted the set to array and then sliced it's first 6 elements. Easy peasy. Set.length is by default undefined and it's useless that's why it's easier to convert it to an array if you need specific length.
let randomSet = new Set();
for (let index = 0; index < 30; index++) {
randomSet.add(Math.floor(Math.random() * 49) + 1)
};
let randomSetToArray = Array.from(randomSet).slice(0,6);
console.log(randomSet);
console.log(randomSetToArray);

An easy way to generate a list of different numbers, no matter the size or number:
function randomNumber(max) {
return Math.floor(Math.random() * max + 1);
}
const list = []
while(list.length < 10 ){
let nbr = randomNumber(500)
if(!list.find(el => el === nbr)) list.push(nbr)
}
console.log("list",list)

I would like to add--
var RecordKeeper = {};
SRandom = function () {
currTimeStamp = new Date().getTime();
if (RecordKeeper.hasOwnProperty(currTimeStamp)) {
RecordKeeper[currTimeStamp] = RecordKeeper[currTimeStamp] + 1;
return currTimeStamp.toString() + RecordKeeper[currTimeStamp];
}
else {
RecordKeeper[currTimeStamp] = 1;
return currTimeStamp.toString() + RecordKeeper[currTimeStamp];
}
}
This uses timestamp (every millisecond) to always generate a unique number.

you can do this. Have a public array of keys that you have used and check against them with this function:
function in_array(needle, haystack)
{
for(var key in haystack)
{
if(needle === haystack[key])
{
return true;
}
}
return false;
}
(function from: javascript function inArray)
So what you can do is:
var done = [];
setInterval(function() {
var m = null;
while(m == null || in_array(m, done)){
m = Math.floor(Math.random()*7);
}
done.push(m);
$('.foo:nth-of-type('+m+')').fadeIn(300);
}, 300);
This code will get stuck after getting all seven numbers so you need to make sure it exists after it fins them all.

Get the intersection of n arrays

Using ES6's Set, given two arrays we can get the intersection like so:
let a = new Set([1,2,3])
let b = new Set([1,2,4])
let intersect = new Set([...a].filter(i => b.has(i)));
How can we get the intersection of n arrays?
Update:
I'm trying to wrap my head around this for the following use case. I have a two dimensional array with at least one element.
parts.forEach(part => {
intersection = new Set()
})
How would you get the intersection of each element (array) in parts?

Assuming you have some function function intersect(set1, set2) {...} that can intersect two sets, you can get the intersection of an array of sets using reduce:
function intersect(a, b) {
return new Set(a.filter(i => b.has(i)));
}
var sets = [new Set([1,2,3]), ...];
var intersection = sets.reduce(intersect);

You can create an intersect helper function using a combination of Array methods like .filter(), .map(), and .every().
This answer is inspired by the comment above from Xufox, who mentioned using Array#every in a filter predicate.
function intersect (first = [], ...rest) {
rest = rest.map(array => new Set(array))
return first.filter(e => rest.every(set => set.has(e)))
}
let parts = [
[1, 2, 3],
[1, 2, 4],
[1, 5, 2]
]
console.log(
intersect(...parts)
)

ES6 still has a while
This is the type of function that can easily cause long lags due to excessive amounts of processing. This is more true with the unquestioning and even preferential use of ES6 and array methods like reduce, filter etc, over simple old fashioned loops like while and for.
When calculating the intersection of many sets the amount of work done per iteration should go down if an item has been found not to be part of the intersection. Because forEach can not break you are forced to still iterate all elements. Adding some code to avoid doing the search if the current item has been found to not belong can improve the performance, but it is a real kludge.
The is also the tendency to just create whole new datasets just to remove a single item from an array, set, or map. This is a very bad habit that i see more and more of as people adopt the ES5 way.
Get the intersection of n sets.
So to the problem at hand. Find the intersection of many sets.
Solution B
A typical ES6 solution
function intersectB(firstSet, ...sets) {
// function to intercept two sets
var intersect = (a,b) => {
return new Set([...a].filter(item => b.has(item)))
};
// iterate all sets comparing the first set to each.
sets.forEach(sItem => firstSet = intersect(firstSet, sItem));
// return the result.
return firstSet;
}
var sets = [new Set([1,2,3,4]), new Set([1,2,4,6,8]), new Set([1,3,4,6,8])];
var inter = intersectB(...sets);
console.log([...inter]);
Works well and for the simple test case execution time is under a millisecond. But in my book it is a memory hogging knot of inefficiency, creating arrays, and sets at every line almost and iterating whole sets when the outcome is already known.
Let's give it some more work. 100 sets, with up to 10000 items over 10 tests each with differing amount of matching items. Most of the intercepts will return empty sets.
Warning will cause page to hang up to one whole second... :(
// Create a set of numbers from 0 and < count
// With a odds for any number occurring to be odds
// return as a new set;
function createLargeSet(count,odds){
var numbers = new Set();
while(count-- > 0){
if(Math.random() < odds){
numbers.add(count);
}
}
return numbers;
}
// create a array of large sets
function bigArrayOfSets(setCount,setMaxSize,odds){
var bigSets = [];
for(var i = 0; i < setCount; i ++){
bigSets.push(createLargeSet(setMaxSize,odds));
}
return bigSets;
}
function intersectB(firstSet, ...sets) {
var intersect = (a,b) => {
return new Set([...a].filter(item => b.has(item)))
};
sets.forEach(sItem => firstSet = intersect(firstSet, sItem));
return firstSet;
}
var testSets = [];
for(var i = 0.1; i <= 1; i += 0.1){
testSets.push(bigArrayOfSets(100,10000,i));
}
var now = performance.now();
testSets.forEach(testDat => intersectB(...testDat));
var time = performance.now() - now;
console.log("Execution time : " + time);
Solution A
A better way, not as fancy but much more efficient.
function intersectA(firstSet,...sets) {
var count = sets.length;
var result = new Set(firstSet); // Only create one copy of the set
firstSet.forEach(item => {
var i = count;
var allHave = true;
while(i--){
allHave = sets[i].has(item)
if(!allHave) { break } // loop only until item fails test
}
if(!allHave){
result.delete(item); // remove item from set rather than
// create a whole new set
}
})
return result;
}
Compare
So now let's compare both, if you are feeling lucky try and guess the performance difference, it's a good way to gage your understanding of Javascript execution.
// Create a set of numbers from 0 and < count
// With a odds for any number occurring to be odds
// return as a new set;
function createLargeSet(count,odds){
var numbers = new Set();
while(count-- > 0){
if(Math.random() < odds){
numbers.add(count);
}
}
return numbers;
}
// create a array of large sets
function bigArrayOfSets(setCount,setMaxSize,odds){
var bigSets = [];
for(var i = 0; i < setCount; i ++){
bigSets.push(createLargeSet(setMaxSize,odds));
}
return bigSets;
}
function intersectA(firstSet,...sets) {
var count = sets.length;
var result = new Set(firstSet); // Only create one copy of the set
firstSet.forEach(item => {
var i = count;
var allHave = true;
while(i--){
allHave = sets[i].has(item)
if(!allHave) { break } // loop only until item fails test
}
if(!allHave){
result.delete(item); // remove item from set rather than
// create a whole new set
}
})
return result;
}
function intersectB(firstSet, ...sets) {
var intersect = (a,b) => {
return new Set([...a].filter(item => b.has(item)))
};
sets.forEach(sItem => firstSet = intersect(firstSet, sItem));
return firstSet;
}
var testSets = [];
for(var i = 0.1; i <= 1; i += 0.1){
testSets.push(bigArrayOfSets(100,10000,i));
}
var now = performance.now();
testSets.forEach(testDat => intersectB(...testDat));
var time = performance.now() - now;
console.log("Execution time 'intersectB' : " + time);
var now = performance.now();
testSets.forEach(testDat => intersectA(...testDat));
var time = performance.now() - now;
console.log("Execution time 'intersectA' : " + time);
As you can see using a simple while loop may not be a cool as using filter but the performance benefit is huge, and something to keep in mind next time you are writing that perfect 3 line ES6 array manipulation function. Dont forget about for and while.

The most efficient algorithm for intersecting n arrays is the one implemented in fast_array_intersect. It runs in O(n), where n is the total number of elements in all the arrays.
The base principle is simple: iterate over all the arrays, storing the number of times you see each element in a map. Then filter the smallest array, to return only the elements that have been seen in all the arrays. (source code).
You can use the library with a simple :
import intersect from 'fast_array_intersect'
intersect([[1,2,3], [1,2,6]]) // --> [1,2]

OK i guess the most efficient way of performing the Array intersection is by utilizing a Map or Hash object. Here I test 1000 arrays each with ~1000 random integer items among 1..175 for an intersection. The result is obtained in less than 100msec.
function setIntersection(a){
var m = new Map(),
r = new Set(),
l = a.length;
a.forEach(sa => new Set(sa).forEach(n => m.has(n) ? m.set(n,m.get(n)+1)
: m.set(n,1)));
m.forEach((v,k) => v === l && r.add(k));
return r;
}
var testSets = Array(1000).fill().map(_ => Array(1000).fill().map(_ => ~~(Math.random()*175+1)));
console.time("int");
result = setIntersection(testSets);
console.timeEnd("int");
console.log(JSON.stringify([...result]));

Counting in binary

I'm only learning to program and was trying to make a program to count in binary.
I made a function that could convert the provided decimal to binary and it looks to be working just ok, but when I try to count upwards using a for loop my browser freezes and I can't understand why. Using a similar while loop produces the result I needed.
The problem is right at the bottom commented out. Please help figure out what I'm doing wrong here.
Here's my code:
function isOdd(num) {return num % 2};
var toBinary = function (number) {
ints = [];
binary = [];
ints.push(Math.floor(number));
while (number >= 1) {
number = (Math.floor(number))/2;
ints.push(Math.floor(number));
}
for (i=ints.length-1;i>=0;i--) {
if (isOdd(ints[i])) {
binary.push(1);
} else {
binary.push(0);
}
}
if (binary[0] === 0) {
binary.splice(0,1);
}
return binary;
};
var count = 0;
while (count <= 50) {
console.log(toBinary(count));
count++;
}
/*
for (i=1;i<=50;i++) {
console.log(toBinary(i));
}
*/

Use for (var i=ints.length-1;i>=0;i--) and for (var i=1;i<=50;i++), otherwise i will be a global variable and it will be overwritten inside toBinary.

You haven't declared i in the toBinary function, hence i is redefined on every call of toBinary in the last loop, and i will never reach 50.
Use var to declare variables like so:
var toBinary = function (number) {
var ints = [],
binary = [],
i;
:
}

Random Number with javascript or jquery

I am trying to make a script to pick random number between two numbers . but it picks same number sometimes. i donot want to repeat same number until array is finished .
Here is my code
$(document).ready(function () {
abc();
test = array();
function abc() {
res = randomXToY(1, 10, 0);
$('#img' + res).fadeTo(1200, 1);
//$(this).addClass('activeImg');
//});
setTimeout(function () {
removeClassImg(res)
}, 3000);
}
function removeClassImg(res) {
$('#img' + res).fadeTo(1200, 0.1);
//$('#img' + res).removeClass('activeImg');
abc();
}
function randomXToY(minVal, maxVal, floatVal) {
var randVal = minVal + (Math.random() * (maxVal - minVal));
return typeof floatVal == 'undefined' ? Math.round(randVal) : randVal.toFixed(floatVal);
}
});
Does Anybody have idea about this ...

You'll have to maintain a list of numbers that have already been generated, and check against this list. Re-generate a new number if you find a dupe.

If you do not want the random numbers repeating themselves you have to keep track of the some way.
If you have the range you are dealing with is relatively small, you can create an array with all possible results and simply randomly pick out of it.
function Randomizer(minVal, maxVal, floatVal){
var possible_results = []; // for larger arrays you can build this using a loop of course
var randomization_array = [];
var count = minVal;
var incrementor = floatVal || 1; // set the distance between possible values (if floatVal equals 0 we round to 1)
while (count <= maxVal) {
possible_results.push(count);
count += incrementor;
}
this.run = function(){
// if randomization_array is empty set posssible results into it
randomization_array = randomization_array.length ? randomization_array : $.merge(randomization_array, possible_results);
// pick a random element within the array
var rand = Math.floor(Math.random()*randomization_array.length);
// return the relevant element
return randomization_array.splice(rand,1)[0];
}
}
and in order to use it (it creates a specialized object for each possible range):
rand = new Randomizer(1,10,0);
rand.run();
note that this approach does not work well for very large ranges