Develop Reference

Randomly order elements in an array Once in React (Possibly using Use effect)

I'm working on a solo project quizzical whilst learning react but cant find a solution to give the answers a random order without breaking my code. I have tried to use a shuffle function but this just causes the order of the answers to change with every click, I also tried to add the correct answer at a random index but the same problem happened. Not sure if I have to totally restructure my code or if there is a workaround. Be great if someone could take a look.
https://scrimba.com/learn/learnreact/fork-of-section-4-solo-project-coc8e46febb53e8d33018993e
I have attempted to use useEffect but really unsure if this is a situation where it should be used, this is just what i've left in my code. Removing the useEffect shuffles on every button click placing answers in the wrong places. I have included this code but may be hard to gauge the problem so scrim is attached
const incorrectIds = [nanoid(), nanoid(), nanoid()]
let counter = 0
const correctAnswer =
<button
value='correct'
id={correctId}
onClick={e => {
changeClass(correctId, 'correct')
props.answerQuestion(e, 'correct')
}}>
{props.result.correct_answer}</button>
let answers = props.result.incorrect_answers
let allAnswers = answers.map(answer => {
const id = incorrectIds[counter]
counter++
return (
<button
value='incorrect'
id={id}
onClick={e => {
changeClass(correctId, 'correct')
changeClass(id, 'incorrect')
props.answerQuestion(e, 'incorrect')
}}>
{answer}</button>)})
allAnswers.push(correctAnswer)
React.useEffect(function() {
allAnswers = shuffle(allAnswers)
}, [])```

I solved the problem by setting state of a randomly sorted array within use effect only changing when props.result changed
const [randomArray, setRandomArray] = React.useState([])
React.useEffect(function() {
setRandomArray(shuffle(allAnswers))
}, [props.result])

Vue JS - Loop through a computed property to display a list of years

I currently have the following code that lists a list of years. I feel that all this code may be very unnecessary and perhaps a computed property for validYears, would help me make this code more optimal and get rid of the unnecessary watchers. My issue is converting this to a computed property as I'm failing to grasp the correct logic to achieve this. I'd appreciate if someone can offer an example of how I can set a computed property for valid years and still return the same result.
onBeforeMount(calculateDateRange)
watch(() => props.earliestDate, (newValue, prevValue) => {
calculateDateRange();
});
// If there is a new value passed from the parent, the dropdown should display that new value.
watch(() => props.latestDate, (newValue, prevValue) => {
calculateDateRange()
});
const validYears = ref([])
function calculateDateRange () {
for(let year = props.latestDate; year >= props.earliestDate; year--){
validYears.value.push(year)
}
}
I didn't provide the rest of the code not to clutter the question, but as one can see in this component I have a set of props that determine the values in my for loop.

You could optimize it as follows :
const validYears = computed(()=>{
let _years=[]
for(let year = props.latestDate; year >= props.earliestDate; year--){
_years.push(year)
}
return _years;
})

Match players in array of game searches

I have thought about this alot but i cant find a good solution..that is also fast in Javascript.
I have an array of objects..the objects are game searches for a random player.
The array may look like this:
const GameSearches[
{fromPlayerId:"378329",goalScore:20}
{fromPlayerId:"125342",goalScore:20}
{fromPlayerId:"378329",goalScore:20}
{fromPlayerId:"918273",goalScore:20}
{fromPlayerId:"378329",goalScore:20}
]
In this array i need to rund a function called CreateNewGame(Player1,Player2).
In this array i could create games with for example index 0 and 1. Index 2 and 3. Index 4 would be left in the array as there are no more players to match on.
Anyone got a good solution to this? It would really help me out.
I have tried different filter and map without finding a good solution.
The output should call a function createnewgame
Example:
createNewGame(GameSearches[0].from,GameSearches[1].from)
this function will be called as there are two players looking for a game. they do not have they same fromPlayerId so they should match.
I see some comments on that StackOverflow is not a free codingservice..the app has thousands of lines..this is only a small part. Im asking becouse i cant figure out the logic on how to to this. I do not need a full working example.

You can try something like this
const GameSearches = [
{fromPlayerId:"378329",goalScore:20},
{fromPlayerId:"125342",goalScore:20},
{fromPlayerId:"378329",goalScore:20},
{fromPlayerId:"918273",goalScore:20},
{fromPlayerId:"378329",goalScore:20}
];
const createNewGames = (player1, player2) => console.log(player1.fromPlayerId, player2.fromPlayerId)
const getMatch = (GameSearches) => {
while([...new Set(GameSearches)].length > 1){
const player1 = GameSearches[0];
GameSearches.shift();
const player2Index = GameSearches.findIndex(el => el.fromPlayerId !== player1.fromPlayerId)
const player2 = GameSearches[player2Index];
GameSearches.splice(player2Index,1)
createNewGames(player1, player2);
}
}
getMatch(GameSearches);

I think maybe i can use the suggestion of a for loop..and it will work fine.
for (let i = 0; i < games20GoalScore.length; i = i + 2) {
if (games20GoalScore[i + 1] !== undefined) {
console.log(games20GoalScore[i] + " : " + games20GoalScore[i + 1]);
if (games20GoalScore[i].from !== games20GoalScore[i + 1].from) {
console.log("Match");
}
}
}
This code is run each time the array get a new item.

Comparing 2 Json Object using javascript or underscore

PS: I have already searched the forums and have seen the relevant posts for this wherein the same post exists but I am not able to resolve my issue with those solutions.
I have 2 json objects
var json1 = [{uid:"111", addrs:"abc", tab:"tab1"},{uid:"222", addrs:"def", tab:"tab2"}];
var json2 = [{id:"tab1"},{id:"new"}];
I want to compare both these and check if the id element in json2 is present in json1 by comparing to its tab key. If not then set some boolean to false. ie by comparing id:"tab1" in json2 to tab:"tab1 in json1 .
I tried using below solutions as suggested by various posts:
var o1 = json1;
var o2 = json2;
var set= false;
for (var p in o1) {
if (o1.hasOwnProperty(p)) {
if (o1[p].tab!== o2[p].id) {
set= true;
}
}
}
for (var p in o2) {
if (o2.hasOwnProperty(p)) {
if (o1[p].tab!== o2[p].id) {
set= true;
}
}
}
Also tried with underscore as:
_.each(json1, function(one) {
_.each(json2, function(two) {
if (one.tab!== two.id) {
set= true;
}
});
});
Both of them fail for some test case or other.
Can anyone tell any other better method or outline the issues above.

Don't call them JSON because they are JavaScript arrays. Read What is JSON.
To solve the problem, you may loop over second array and then in the iteration check if none of the objects in the first array matched the criteria. If so, set the result to true.
const obj1 = [{uid:"111", addrs:"abc", tab:"tab1"},{uid:"222",addrs:"def", tab:"tab2"}];
const obj2 = [{id:"tab1"},{id:"new"}];
let result = false;
for (let {id} of obj2) {
if (!obj1.some(i => i.tab === id)) {
result = true;
break;
}
}
console.log(result);

Unfortunately, searching the forums and reading the relevant posts is not going to replace THINKING. Step away from your computer, and write down, on a piece of paper, exactly what the problem is and how you plan to solve it. For example:
Calculate for each object in an array whether some object in another array has a tab property whose value is the same as the first object's id property.
There are many ways to do this. The first way involves using array functions like map (corresponding to the "calculate for each" in the question, and some (corresponding to the "some" in the question). To make it easier, and try to avoid confusing ourselves, we'll do it step by step.
function calculateMatch(obj2) {
return obj2.map(doesSomeElementInObj1Match);
}
That's it. Your program is finished. You don't even need to test it, because it's obviously right.
But wait. How are you supposed to know about these array functions like map and some? By reading the documentation. No one help you with that. You have to do it yourself. You have to do it in advance as part of your learning process. You can't do it at the moment you need it, because you won't know what you don't know!
If it's easier for you to understand, and you're just getting started with functions, you may want to write this as
obj2.map(obj1Element => doesSomeElementInObj1Match(obj1Element))
or, if you're still not up to speed on arrow functions, then
obj2.map(function(obj1Element) { return doesSomeElementInObj1Match(obj1Element); })
The only thing left to do is to write doesSomeElementInObj2Match. For testing purposes, we can make one that always returns true:
function doesSomeElementInObj2Match() { return true; }
But eventually we will have to write it. Remember the part of our English description of the problem that's relevant here:
some object in another array has a tab property whose value is the same as the first object's id property.
When working with JS arrays, for "some" we have the some function. So, following the same top-down approach, we are going to write (assuming we know what the ID is):
In the same way as above, we can write this as
function doesSomeElementInObj2Match(id) {
obj2.some(obj2Element => tabFieldMatches(obj2Element, id))
}
or
obj2.some(function(obj2Element) { return tabFieldMatches(obj2Element, id); })
Here, tabFieldMatches is nothing more than checking to make sure obj2Element.tab and id are identical.
We're almost done! but we still have to write hasMatchingTabField. That's quite easy, it turns out:
function hasMatchingTabField(e2, id) { return e2.tab === id; }
In the following, to save space, we will write e1 for obj1Element and e2 for obj2Element, and stick with the arrow functions. This completes our first solution. We have
const tabFieldMatches = (tab, id) { return tab === id; }
const hasMatchingTabField = (obj, id) => obj.some(e => tabFieldMatches(e.tab, id);
const findMatches = obj => obj.some(e => hasMatchingTabField(e1, obj.id));
And we call this using findMatches(obj1).
Old-fashioned array
But perhaps all these maps and somes are a little too much for you at this point. What ever happened to good old-fashioned for-loops? Yes, we can write things this way, and some people might prefer that alternative.
top: for (e1 of obj1) {
for (e2 of (obj2) {
if (e1.id === e2.tab) {
console.log("found match");
break top;
}
}
console.log("didn't find match);
}
But some people are sure to complain about the non-standard use of break here. Or, we might want to end up with an array of boolean parallel to the input array. In that case, we have to be careful about remembering what matched, at what level.
const matched = [];
for (e1 of obj1) {
let match = false;
for (e2 of obj2) {
if (e1.id === e2.tab) match = true;
}
matched.push(match);
}
We can clean this up and optimize it bit, but that's the basic idea. Notice that we have to reset match each time through the loop over the first object.

How to manage state without using Subject or imperative manipulation in a simple RxJS example?

I have been experimenting with RxJS for two weeks now, and although I love it in principle I just cannot seem to find and implement the correct pattern for managing state. All articles and questions appear to agree:
Subject should be avoided where possible in favor of just pushing state through via transformations;
.getValue() should be deprecated entirely; and
.do should perhaps be avoided except for DOM manipulation?
The problem with all such suggestions is that none of the literature appears to directly say what you should be using instead, besides "you'll learn the Rx way and stop using Subject".
But I cannot find a direct example anywhere that specifically indicates the correct way to perform both additions and removals to a single stream/object, as the consequence of multiple other stream inputs, in a stateless and functional manner.
Before I get pointed in the same directions again, problems with uncovered literature are:
The Introduction to Reactive Programming You've been missing: great starting text, but does not specifically address these questions.
The TODO example for RxJS comes with React and involves explicit manipulation of Subjects as proxies for React Stores.
http://blog.edanschwartz.com/2015/09/18/dead-simple-rxjs-todo-list/ : explicitly uses a state object for addition and removal of items.
My perhaps 10th rewrite of the standard TODO follows - My prior iterations covered include:
starting with a mutable 'items' array - bad as state is explicit and imperatively managed
using scan to concatenate new items to an addedItems$ stream, then branching another stream where the removed items were deleted - bad as the addedItems$ stream would grow indefinitely.
discovering BehaviorSubjectand using that - seemed bad since for each new updatedList$.next() emission, it requires the previous value to iterate, meaning that Subject.getValue() is essential.
trying to stream the result of the inputEnter$ addition events into filtered removal events - but then every new stream creates a new list, and then feeding that into the toggleItem$ and toggleAll$ streams means that each new stream is dependent on the previous, and so causing one of the 4 actions (add, remove, toggle item or toggle all) requires the whole chain to be unnecessarily run through again.
Now I have come full circle, where I am back to using both Subject (and just how is it supposed to be successively iterated upon in any way without using getValue()?) and do, as show below. Myself and my colleague agree this is the clearest way, yet it of course seems the least reactive and most imperative. Any clear suggestions on the correct way for this would be much appreciated!
import Rx from 'rxjs/Rx';
import h from 'virtual-dom/h';
import diff from 'virtual-dom/diff';
import patch from 'virtual-dom/patch';
const todoListContainer = document.querySelector('#todo-items-container');
const newTodoInput = document.querySelector('#new-todo');
const todoMain = document.querySelector('#main');
const todoFooter = document.querySelector('#footer');
const inputToggleAll = document.querySelector('#toggle-all');
const ENTER_KEY = 13;
// INTENTS
const inputEnter$ = Rx.Observable.fromEvent(newTodoInput, 'keyup')
.filter(event => event.keyCode === ENTER_KEY)
.map(event => event.target.value)
.filter(value => value.trim().length)
.map(value => {
return { label: value, completed: false };
});
const inputItemClick$ = Rx.Observable.fromEvent(todoListContainer, 'click');
const inputToggleAll$ = Rx.Observable.fromEvent(inputToggleAll, 'click')
.map(event => event.target.checked);
const inputToggleItem$ = inputItemClick$
.filter(event => event.target.classList.contains('toggle'))
.map((event) => {
return {
label: event.target.nextElementSibling.innerText.trim(),
completed: event.target.checked,
};
})
const inputDoubleClick$ = Rx.Observable.fromEvent(todoListContainer, 'dblclick')
.filter(event => event.target.tagName === 'LABEL')
.do((event) => {
event.target.parentElement.classList.toggle('editing');
})
.map(event => event.target.innerText.trim());
const inputClickDelete$ = inputItemClick$
.filter(event => event.target.classList.contains('destroy'))
.map((event) => {
return { label: event.target.previousElementSibling.innerText.trim(), completed: false };
});
const list$ = new Rx.BehaviorSubject([]);
// MODEL / OPERATIONS
const addItem$ = inputEnter$
.do((item) => {
inputToggleAll.checked = false;
list$.next(list$.getValue().concat(item));
});
const removeItem$ = inputClickDelete$
.do((removeItem) => {
list$.next(list$.getValue().filter(item => item.label !== removeItem.label));
});
const toggleAll$ = inputToggleAll$
.do((allComplete) => {
list$.next(toggleAllComplete(list$.getValue(), allComplete));
});
function toggleAllComplete(arr, allComplete) {
inputToggleAll.checked = allComplete;
return arr.map((item) =>
({ label: item.label, completed: allComplete }));
}
const toggleItem$ = inputToggleItem$
.do((toggleItem) => {
let allComplete = toggleItem.completed;
let noneComplete = !toggleItem.completed;
const list = list$.getValue().map(item => {
if (item.label === toggleItem.label) {
item.completed = toggleItem.completed;
}
if (allComplete && !item.completed) {
allComplete = false;
}
if (noneComplete && item.completed) {
noneComplete = false;
}
return item;
});
if (allComplete) {
list$.next(toggleAllComplete(list, true));
return;
}
if (noneComplete) {
list$.next(toggleAllComplete(list, false));
return;
}
list$.next(list);
});
// subscribe to all the events that cause the proxy list$ subject array to be updated
Rx.Observable.merge(addItem$, removeItem$, toggleAll$, toggleItem$).subscribe();
list$.subscribe((list) => {
// DOM side-effects based on list size
todoFooter.style.visibility = todoMain.style.visibility =
(list.length) ? 'visible' : 'hidden';
newTodoInput.value = '';
});
// RENDERING
const tree$ = list$
.map(newList => renderList(newList));
const patches$ = tree$
.bufferCount(2, 1)
.map(([oldTree, newTree]) => diff(oldTree, newTree));
const todoList$ = patches$.startWith(document.querySelector('#todo-list'))
.scan((rootNode, patches) => patch(rootNode, patches));
todoList$.subscribe();
function renderList(arr, allComplete) {
return h('ul#todo-list', arr.map(val =>
h('li', {
className: (val.completed) ? 'completed' : null,
}, [h('input', {
className: 'toggle',
type: 'checkbox',
checked: val.completed,
}), h('label', val.label),
h('button', { className: 'destroy' }),
])));
}
Edit
In relation to #user3743222 very helpful answer, I can see how representing state as an additional input can make a function pure and thus scan is the best way to represent a collection evolving over time, with a snapshot of its previous state up to that point as an additional function parameter.
However, this was already how I approached my second attempt, with addedItems$ being a scanned stream of inputs:
// this list will now grow infinitely, because nothing is ever removed from it at the same time as concatenation?
const listWithItemsAdded$ = inputEnter$
.startWith([])
.scan((list, addItem) => list.concat(addItem));
const listWithItemsAddedAndRemoved$ = inputClickDelete$.withLatestFrom(listWithItemsAdded$)
.scan((list, removeItem) => list.filter(item => item !== removeItem));
// Now I have to always work from the previous list, to get the incorporated amendments...
const listWithItemsAddedAndRemovedAndToggled$ = inputToggleItem$.withLatestFrom(listWithItemsAddedAndRemoved$)
.map((item, list) => {
if (item.checked === true) {
//etc
}
})
// ... and have the event triggering a bunch of previous inputs it may have nothing to do with.
// and so if I have 400 inputs it appears at this stage to still run all the previous functions every time -any- input
// changes, even if I just want to change one small part of state
const n$ = nminus1$.scan...
The obvious solution would be to just have items = [], and manipulate it directly, or const items = new BehaviorSubject([]) - but then the only way to iterate on it appears to be using getValue to expose the previous state, which Andre Stalz (CycleJS) has commented on in the RxJS issues as something that shouldn't really be exposed (but again, if not, then how is it usable?).
I guess I just had an idea that with streams, you weren't supposed to use Subjects or represent anything via a state 'meatball', and in the first answer I'm not sure how this doesn't introduce mass chained streams which are orphaned/grow infinitely/have to build on each other in exact sequence.

I think you already found a good example with : http://jsbin.com/redeko/edit?js,output.
You take issue with the fact that this implementation
explicitly uses a state object for addition and removal of items.
However, thas is exactly the good practice you are looking for. If you rename that state object viewModel for example, it might be more apparent to you.
So what is state?
There will be other definitions but I like to think of state as follows:
given f an impure function, i.e. output = f(input), such that you can have different outputs for the same input, the state associated to that function (when it exists) is the extra variable such that f(input) = output = g(input, state) holds and g is a pure function.
So if the function here is to match an object representing a user input, to an array of todo, and if I click add on a todo list with already have 2 todos, the output will be 3 todos. If I do the same (same input) on a todo list with only one todo, the output will be 2 todos. So same input, different outputs.
The state here that allows to transform that function into a pure function is the current value of the todo array. So my input becomes an add click, AND the current todo array, passed through a function g which give a new todo array with a new todo list. That function g is pure. So f is implemented in a stateless way by making its previously hidden state explicit in g.
And that fits well with functional programming which revolves around composing pure functions.
Rxjs operators
scan
So when it comes to state management, with RxJS or else, a good practice is to make state explicit to manipulate it.
If you turn the output = g(input, state) into a stream, you get On+1 = g(In+1, Sn) and that's exactly what the scan operator does.
expand
Another operator which generalizes scan is expand, but so far I had very little use of that operator. scan generally does the trick.
Sorry for the long and mathy answer. It took me a while to get around those concepts and that's the way I made them understandable for me. Hopefully it works for you too.