Develop Reference

Check if a word matches another in a map function in JS [duplicate]

I would like to filter an array of items by using the map() function. Here is a code snippet:
var filteredItems = items.map(function(item)
{
if( ...some condition... )
{
return item;
}
});
The problem is that filtered out items still uses space in the array and I would like to completely wipe them out.
Any idea?
EDIT: Thanks, I forgot about filter(), what I wanted is actually a filter() then a map().
EDIT2: Thanks for pointing that map() and filter() are not implemented in all browsers, although my specific code was not intended to run in a browser.

You should use the filter method rather than map unless you want to mutate the items in the array, in addition to filtering.
eg.
var filteredItems = items.filter(function(item)
{
return ...some condition...;
});
[Edit: Of course you could always do sourceArray.filter(...).map(...) to both filter and mutate]

Inspired by writing this answer, I ended up later expanding and writing a blog post going over this in careful detail. I recommend checking that out if you want to develop a deeper understanding of how to think about this problem--I try to explain it piece by piece, and also give a JSperf comparison at the end, going over speed considerations.
That said, **The tl;dr is this:
To accomplish what you're asking for (filtering and mapping within one function call), you would use Array.reduce()**.
However, the more readable and (less importantly) usually significantly faster2 approach is to just use filter and map chained together:
[1,2,3].filter(num => num > 2).map(num => num * 2)
What follows is a description of how Array.reduce() works, and how it can be used to accomplish filter and map in one iteration. Again, if this is too condensed, I highly recommend seeing the blog post linked above, which is a much more friendly intro with clear examples and progression.
You give reduce an argument that is a (usually anonymous) function.
That anonymous function takes two parameters--one (like the anonymous functions passed in to map/filter/forEach) is the iteratee to be operated on. There is another argument for the anonymous function passed to reduce, however, that those functions do not accept, and that is the value that will be passed along between function calls, often referred to as the memo.
Note that while Array.filter() takes only one argument (a function), Array.reduce() also takes an important (though optional) second argument: an initial value for 'memo' that will be passed into that anonymous function as its first argument, and subsequently can be mutated and passed along between function calls. (If it is not supplied, then 'memo' in the first anonymous function call will by default be the first iteratee, and the 'iteratee' argument will actually be the second value in the array)
In our case, we'll pass in an empty array to start, and then choose whether to inject our iteratee into our array or not based on our function--this is the filtering process.
Finally, we'll return our 'array in progress' on each anonymous function call, and reduce will take that return value and pass it as an argument (called memo) to its next function call.
This allows filter and map to happen in one iteration, cutting down our number of required iterations in half--just doing twice as much work each iteration, though, so nothing is really saved other than function calls, which are not so expensive in javascript.
For a more complete explanation, refer to MDN docs (or to my post referenced at the beginning of this answer).
Basic example of a Reduce call:
let array = [1,2,3];
const initialMemo = [];
array = array.reduce((memo, iteratee) => {
// if condition is our filter
if (iteratee > 1) {
// what happens inside the filter is the map
memo.push(iteratee * 2);
}
// this return value will be passed in as the 'memo' argument
// to the next call of this function, and this function will have
// every element passed into it at some point.
return memo;
}, initialMemo)
console.log(array) // [4,6], equivalent to [(2 * 2), (3 * 2)]
more succinct version:
[1,2,3].reduce((memo, value) => value > 1 ? memo.concat(value * 2) : memo, [])
Notice that the first iteratee was not greater than one, and so was filtered. Also note the initialMemo, named just to make its existence clear and draw attention to it. Once again, it is passed in as 'memo' to the first anonymous function call, and then the returned value of the anonymous function is passed in as the 'memo' argument to the next function.
Another example of the classic use case for memo would be returning the smallest or largest number in an array. Example:
[7,4,1,99,57,2,1,100].reduce((memo, val) => memo > val ? memo : val)
// ^this would return the largest number in the list.
An example of how to write your own reduce function (this often helps understanding functions like these, I find):
test_arr = [];
// we accept an anonymous function, and an optional 'initial memo' value.
test_arr.my_reducer = function(reduceFunc, initialMemo) {
// if we did not pass in a second argument, then our first memo value
// will be whatever is in index zero. (Otherwise, it will
// be that second argument.)
const initialMemoIsIndexZero = arguments.length < 2;
// here we use that logic to set the memo value accordingly.
let memo = initialMemoIsIndexZero ? this[0] : initialMemo;
// here we use that same boolean to decide whether the first
// value we pass in as iteratee is either the first or second
// element
const initialIteratee = initialMemoIsIndexZero ? 1 : 0;
for (var i = initialIteratee; i < this.length; i++) {
// memo is either the argument passed in above, or the
// first item in the list. initialIteratee is either the
// first item in the list, or the second item in the list.
memo = reduceFunc(memo, this[i]);
// or, more technically complete, give access to base array
// and index to the reducer as well:
// memo = reduceFunc(memo, this[i], i, this);
}
// after we've compressed the array into a single value,
// we return it.
return memo;
}
The real implementation allows access to things like the index, for example, but I hope this helps you get an uncomplicated feel for the gist of it.

That's not what map does. You really want Array.filter. Or if you really want to remove the elements from the original list, you're going to need to do it imperatively with a for loop.

Array Filter method
var arr = [1, 2, 3]
// ES5 syntax
arr = arr.filter(function(item){ return item != 3 })
// ES2015 syntax
arr = arr.filter(item => item != 3)
console.log( arr )

You must note however that the Array.filter is not supported in all browser so, you must to prototyped:
//This prototype is provided by the Mozilla foundation and
//is distributed under the MIT license.
//http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/Linux/LICENSES/mit.license
if (!Array.prototype.filter)
{
Array.prototype.filter = function(fun /*, thisp*/)
{
var len = this.length;
if (typeof fun != "function")
throw new TypeError();
var res = new Array();
var thisp = arguments[1];
for (var i = 0; i < len; i++)
{
if (i in this)
{
var val = this[i]; // in case fun mutates this
if (fun.call(thisp, val, i, this))
res.push(val);
}
}
return res;
};
}
And doing so, you can prototype any method you may need.

TLDR: Use map (returning undefined when needed) and then filter.
First, I believe that a map + filter function is useful since you don't want to repeat a computation in both. Swift originally called this function flatMap but then renamed it to compactMap.
For example, if we don't have a compactMap function, we might end up with computation defined twice:
let array = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8];
let mapped = array
.filter(x => {
let computation = x / 2 + 1;
let isIncluded = computation % 2 === 0;
return isIncluded;
})
.map(x => {
let computation = x / 2 + 1;
return `${x} is included because ${computation} is even`
})
// Output: [2 is included because 2 is even, 6 is included because 4 is even]
Thus compactMap would be useful to reduce duplicate code.
A really simple way to do something similar to compactMap is to:
Map on real values or undefined.
Filter out all the undefined values.
This of course relies on you never needing to return undefined values as part of your original map function.
Example:
let array = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8];
let mapped = array
.map(x => {
let computation = x / 2 + 1;
let isIncluded = computation % 2 === 0;
if (isIncluded) {
return `${x} is included because ${computation} is even`
} else {
return undefined
}
})
.filter(x => typeof x !== "undefined")

I just wrote array intersection that correctly handles also duplicates
https://gist.github.com/gkucmierz/8ee04544fa842411f7553ef66ac2fcf0
// array intersection that correctly handles also duplicates
const intersection = (a1, a2) => {
const cnt = new Map();
a2.map(el => cnt[el] = el in cnt ? cnt[el] + 1 : 1);
return a1.filter(el => el in cnt && 0 < cnt[el]--);
};
const l = console.log;
l(intersection('1234'.split``, '3456'.split``)); // [ '3', '4' ]
l(intersection('12344'.split``, '3456'.split``)); // [ '3', '4' ]
l(intersection('1234'.split``, '33456'.split``)); // [ '3', '4' ]
l(intersection('12334'.split``, '33456'.split``)); // [ '3', '3', '4' ]

First you can use map and with chaining you can use filter
state.map(item => {
if(item.id === action.item.id){
return {
id : action.item.id,
name : item.name,
price: item.price,
quantity : item.quantity-1
}
}else{
return item;
}
}).filter(item => {
if(item.quantity <= 0){
return false;
}else{
return true;
}
});

following statement cleans object using map function.
var arraytoclean = [{v:65, toberemoved:"gronf"}, {v:12, toberemoved:null}, {v:4}];
arraytoclean.map((x,i)=>x.toberemoved=undefined);
console.dir(arraytoclean);

Javascript, looping through an array and the arguments "object"

I can't get my head around this, i'm using filter to loop through an array and filter out all the integers passed as arguments ,i'm not limited in the number of arguments.
But i'm stuck here when it's about to get back to the function the value of the arguments object, at least more that once.
In my code below, obviously it's not fully working because i'm doing a return within the for…in loop, this is where i don't get how I can get the this second loop without having i re-initialised to 0…
function destroyer(arr) {
var args = arguments.length;
var arg0 = arguments[0];
var Nargs = Array.prototype.slice.call(arguments, 1);
var newArr = [];
newArr = arg0.filter(filtre);
/*Only the first argument is
filtered out,here it's the value "2",
but should filter out [2,3].
The expected result is [1,1]*/
console.log(newArr);
return newArr;
function filtre(e){
for (var i in Nargs){
return e !== Nargs[i];
}
}
}
destroyer([1, 2, 3, 1, 2, 3], 2,3);
Hope this is clear enough,
Thanks for any input !
Matth.

While rgthree provided a solution very similar to what you already had, I wanted to provide a solution that takes advantage of newer ES6 features for modern browsers. If you run this through Babel, it will result in essentially the same code as in that solution, though it will still require a shim for the includes call.
function destroyer(source, ...args) {
return source.filter(el => !args.includes(el));
}
Explanation:
...args uses the spread operator to get all but the first argument into an array named args.
We can directly return the filtered array, assuming you don't need to log it and that was just for debugging.
el => !args.includes(el) is an anonymous arrow function. Since no braces are used, it will automatically return the result of the expression.
Since args is an array, we can directly use Array.prototype.includes to check if the current element is in the arguments to be removed. If it exists, we want to remove it and thus invert the return with !. An alternative could be the following: el => args.includes(el) == false.

Since your return statement in your filtre function is always executed on the first run, it's only returning the whether the first number in Nargs is equal to the current item. Instead, you can use indexOf for full browser support (which returns the index of the item in an array, or "-1" if it's not in an array) instead of a loop (or includes, or a loop, etc. as shown further below):
function destroyer(arr) {
var args = arguments.length;
var arg0 = arguments[0];
var Nargs = Array.prototype.slice.call(arguments, 1);
var newArr = [];
function filtre(e){
return Nargs.indexOf(e) === -1;
}
newArr = arg0.filter(filtre);
console.log(newArr);
return newArr;
}
destroyer([1, 2, 3, 1, 2, 3], 2,3);
If you don't need Internet Explorer support, you could use Array.includes:
function filtre(e){
return !Nargs.includes(e);
}
And finally, if you really wanted to use a loop, you would only want to filter an item (return false) once it's found otherwise allow it (return true):
function filtre(e){
for (var i = 0, l = Nargs.length; i < l; i++) {
if (e === Nargs[i])
return false;
}
return true;
}

How to use apply with currying?

I have code that is using currying to get the average on an array that results from concatenating two arrays: an n size array and an m size array.
var avg = function(...n){
let tot=0;
for(let i=0; i<n.length; i++){
tot += n[i];
}
return tot/n.length;
};
var spiceUp = function(fn, ...n){
return function(...m){
return fn.apply(this, n.concat(m));
}
};
var doAvg = spiceUp(avg, 1,2,3);
console.log(doAvg(4,5,6));
In this line return fn.apply(this, n.concat(m));, I don't understand why do we need to use apply. What is the object we are binding with the average function and why does just normal calling (return fn(n.concat(m));) not work?

In that example, this is not that important. It would also work if instead of this you would pass an empty object instead. It's just an example on how to use apply.
What you need to focus is on the second parameter n.concat(m). They key concept here is that passing an array as a second argument you are calling that function (fn) passing each value in the array as an argument.
About your second question: no, it won't work because fn expects several arguments (one per value to calculate the average) while by doing return fn(n.concat(m)); you are just passing one argument, an array containing all values
Maybe you would understand it better with a simpler example:
function sum3params(a,b,c){
return a+b+c;
}
console.log(sum3params([3,4,2])) // won't work
console.log(sum3params.apply(this, [3,4,2])) // will work ('this' is not important here)

For this use case, it does not. But consider the following:
var foo = {
bar: 3
};
var addBar = function(a, b) { return a + b + this.bar };
foo.add3AndBar = spiceUp(addBar, 3);
foo.add3AndBar(1); // 7
Using apply means that your spiceUp function can be applied to methods as well as normal functions. For more likely example, consider partially applying when defining a method on a prototype:
const ENV = "linux";
DoesSomePlatformSpecificStuff.prototype.getPath = spiceUp(ENV);
apply also will spread the gathered array of arguments back out into positional arguments which can also be done like so:
return fn(...n.concat(m));
Which can be simplified as
return fn(...n, ...m);
Which is equivalent to
return fn.apply(undefined, n.concat(m));

Lodash filter and functional composition

I have an array of objects with a media key and the value that may or may be not empty. I have a function to pick that key value and a function that checks that the value is empty so that mediaEmptyComparer({media: ''}) returns true and mediaEmptyComparer({media: 'somevalue'}) is false.
var array = _.times(100, function () { return {media: Math.random() < 0.5 ? '' : 'value'} });
var mediaPicker = _.partialRight(_.get, 'media');
var mediaEmptyComparer = _.flow(mediaPicker, _.isEmpty);
var splittedArray = _.filter(array, mediaEmptyComparer);
console.log(splittedArray);
When I try to use such function as the predicate for _.filter, it always fails (as in the example) but if I write:
var splittedArray = _.filter(array, function (x) { return mediaEmptyComparer(x);});
it works. It's like if the value for each iteration is not passed as argument to the function. Any help? Thanks

Predicate of _.filter() method is invoked with three arguments: value, index|key and collection.
Use an _.ary() method to cap the number of arguments accepted by a method.
https://lodash.com/docs#ary
var splittedArray = _.filter(array, _.ary(mediaEmptyComparer, 1));
For more information check this:
https://github.com/lodash/lodash/issues/844
Good luck!

Is there a JavaScript equivalent for C# 'params'?

I need a method that can have an arbitrary number of parameters. In C# we have the params statement. Do we have anything similar in JavaScript?

There is the arguments collection, which contains all arguments passed to the function.
There is a) no need to specify "optional" arguments in the function signature and b) any function accepts any number of parameters.
function foo() {
console.log(arguments);
}
foo(1,2,3,4); // logs [1, 2, 3, 4]
Likewise, there is no need to supply "required" arguments in a function call:
function foo(a, b, c, d) {
console.log(arguments);
}
foo(1,2); // logs [1, 2]
Any argument named in the signature but not supplied in the function call will be undefined.
Note that arguments behaves like an Array, but technically it isn't one. For example, you can call arguments[0], but you can't call arguments.slice(). What you can do to get around this is using the Array prototype:
Array.prototype.slice.call(arguments, 1, 2);
The so-called rest parameter ... is a new (ES6+) addition to the language and makes working with variadic functions more comfortable. #ArunCM's answer explains it.

I know this thread is too old but I believe something is missing here.
There is Rest parameter (introduced in ECMAScript 6) which will allow us to represent an indefinite number of arguments as an array.
It always returns an array. Which means even in defensive JavaScript land, it’s ok to do things like check .length of rest without guards.
Syntax :
function(a, b, ...theArgs) {
// ...
}
There are three main differences between rest parameters and the arguments object:
rest parameters are only the ones that haven't been given a separate name, while the arguments object contains all arguments passed to the function
the arguments object is not a real array, while rest parameters are Array instances, meaning methods like sort, map, forEach or pop can be applied on it directly;
the arguments object has additional functionality specific to itself (like the callee property).
Additional reading : Spread
function f(x, ...y) {
// y is an Array
return x * y.length;
}
console.log("Expected result : 3*2 = 6 & Actual result : " + f(3, "hello", true));
console.log("Expected result : 3*4 = 12 & Actual result : " + f(3, "a", true, "b", 1));
//here we are not passing anything to "y" but its still safe to check .length of "y" because it always return an array.
console.log("Expected result : 3*0 = 0 & Actual result : " + f(3));

Yes. arguments.
function concatStrings () {
var str = '';
for (var i = 0; i < arguments.length; i++) {
str += arguments[i];
}
return str;
}
Be aware that arguments isn't an array, so it doesn't have methods like join or push. It's just an array-like object (with numerical properties and a length property) so it can be iterated through.

JavaScript has arguments object inside functions. It contains of all params passed to the function.
More info

It is some sort of implicit in the special variable "arguments". Use like this:
function something(arg1, arg2) {
for (var i = 0; i < arguments.length; i++) {
var x = arguments[i];
}
}
Then you can call it like something(1, 2, 3, 'a', 'b', 'c')
More examples here: http://www.jtricks.com/javascript_tutorials/varargs.html

Javascript functions can accept any number of parameters by default. You can see them with the arguments variable.
See here.