When I add two variables that I initialize as numbers, JS considers them as a string and concatenates them. In a calculation as follows,
var p1 = new window.TRIGEO.Point(150, 150);
var p2 = new window.TRIGEO.Point(500, 350);
var p3 = new window.TRIGEO.Point(50, 500);
var medicentre = new Point((p1.x+p2.x+p3.x)/3,(p1.y+p2.y+p3.y)/3);
(where Point has x and y as members),medicentre is huge =>( 5016683.33 , 50116833.33 ). I do not want this when the answer is actually =>( 233.33 , 333.33 ).
Is there any way to override this behaviour without making the formula too long, cause I have another one, which is at least three lines long. Is this possible without using parseInt()?
EDIT:
Point object is the following and that's it!
function Point(x, y) {
this.x = x;
this.y = y;
}
TRIGEO is the name of the library I'm writing to visualize all the important points and line segments of a triangle. Sorry for the confusion, I probably should've edited.
whilst Parsint as already answered is technically correct, if you want a shorter formula you can trick the casting by making your values positive (as long as you know they aren't going to have non-numberic values
var num1 = '1111.11';
var num2 = 2222.22;
var n1plus2 = (+num1)+num2
// n1p2 : 3333.33
or both strings:
var num1 = '1111.11';
var num2 = '2222.22';
var n1p2 = (+num1)+(+num2);
// n1p2 : 3333.33
JavaScript doesn't consider them as string. You probably execute an operation in the Point class and convert them.
function A(x, y) {
this.x = x;
this.y = y;
}
var a = new A(1, 1),
b = new A(2, 2),
c = new A(a.x + b.x, a.y + b.y);
alert(c.x + " - " + c.y)
This will output 3 - 3 as expected.
Related
Stupid question,
but if I have code like this:
var x;
var y;
var z = x + y;
And then through the program I update the variables for x and y, but when I use the console to check var z, it gives me NaN. So the program is doing that calculation once at the beginning and not updating Z as it continues. So what's the solution to keep checking Z for the variable changes? Do I have to do a loop with setInterval to keep checking the new updated Z variable? Thanks
Yeah, your comment is right. JavaScript doesn't provide a way to create a live binging.
So what's the solution to keep checking Z for the variable changes?
All depends on what you are trying to do.
What you think about the code:
var x = 1;
var y = 2;
var z = x + y;
console.log("The value of z variable: ", z);
PS. Preferably you should use let:
let x = 1;
let y = 2;
let z = x + y;
console.log("The value of z variable: ", z);
I'm trying to implement a simple Lotka-Volterra system in JavaScript, but get different result from what I see in academic papers and slides. This is my equations:
sim2.eval("dxdt(x, y) = (2 * x) - (x * y)");
sim2.eval("dydt(x, y) = (-0.25 * y) + (x * y)");
using coefficients a = 2, b = 1, c = 0.25 and d = 1. Yet, my result looks like this:
when I expected a stable oscillation as seen in these PDF slides:
Could it be the implementation of ndsolve that causes this? Or a machine error in JavaScript due to floating-point arithmetic?
Disregard, the error was simply using a too big evaluation step (dt = 0.1, must be 0.01 at least). The numerical method used is known for this problem.
For serious purposes use a higher order method, the minimum is fixed step classical Runge-Kutta. Then you can also use dt=0.1, it is stable for multiple periods, I tried tfinal=300 without problems. However you will see the step size in the graph as it is visibly piecewise linear. This is much reduced with half the step size, dt=0.05.
function odesolveRK4(f, x0, dt, tmax) {
var n = f.size()[0]; // Number of variables
var x = x0.clone(),xh=[]; // Current values of variables
var dxdt = [], k1=[], k2=[], k3=[], k4=[]; // Temporary variable to hold time-derivatives
var result = []; // Contains entire solution
var nsteps = math.divide(tmax, dt); // Number of time steps
dt2 = math.divide(dt,2);
dt6 = math.divide(dt,6);
for(var i=0; i<nsteps; i++) {
// compute the 4 stages if the classical order-4 Runge-Kutta method
k1 = f.map(function(fj) {return fj.apply(null, x.toArray()); } );
xh = math.add(x, math.multiply(k1, dt2));
k2 = f.map(function(fj) {return fj.apply(null, xh.toArray()); } );
xh = math.add(x, math.multiply(k2, dt2));
k3 = f.map(function(fj) {return fj.apply(null, xh.toArray()); } );
xh = math.add(x, math.multiply(k3, dt));
k4 = f.map(function(fj) {return fj.apply(null, xh.toArray()); } );
x = math.add(x, math.multiply(math.add(math.add(k1,k4), math.multiply(math.add(k2,k3),2)), dt6))
if( 0==i%50) console.log("%3d %o %o",i,dt,x.toString());
result.push(x.clone());
}
return math.matrix(result);
}
math.import({odesolveRK4:odesolveRK4});
So, I've got a method to grab particular DIV from x, y coordinates:
this.getCell = function (x, y){
this.index = x + y * this.width;
return this.cells[this.index];
}
I want to use my method with another one:
this.computeCellNextState = function(x, y){
var nearbies = ['x-1,y-1','x,y-1','x+1,y-1'];
var splitter = nearbies[0].split(',');
console.log(this.getCell(splitter[0],splitter[1])); // returns undefined
}
What I want to achieve:
this.getCell(x-1,y-1)
x-1,y-1 are from nearbies[0]
I want to split one string of 'nearbies' and use as 2 parameters.
'x-1,y-1' etc are just strings, they don't mean anything for getCell. You have to work with actual expressions in computeNextState, e.g.
this.computeCellNextState = function(x, y){
var nearbies = [[x-1,y-1],[x,y-1],[x+1,y-1]];
console.log(this.getCell(...nearbies[0]))
}
I just started fiddling around with JavaScript. Coming from Java and OO PHP things are getting weirder with every step :)
This is my introduction project to javascript in which I've set out to program multiplayer working version of Settlers of Catan. Code below is an attempt to store cube coordinates of N sized hexagonal map tiles in an array.
I've read you declare object in javascript by assigning functions to variables.
var Tile = function (x, y, z) {
this.x = x;
this.y = y;
this.z = z;
};
var Map = function () {
var grid = [];
function generate_map(radius) {
for (width = -radius; width <= radius; width++) {
var r1 = Math.max(-radius, -width - radius);
var r2 = Math.min(radius, -width + radius);
for (r = r1; r <= r2; r++) {
grid.push(new Tile(width, r, -width - r));
}
}
}
};
I've tried instantiating new Map object, calling its only function and outprinting the resulting values stores in grid[] array. But for each loop is not playing nice :( I get the unexpected identifier.
var main = function () {
var basic_map = new Map();
basic_map.generate_map(3);
for each (var tile in basic_map.grid) {
console.log(tile.x, tile.y, tile.z);
}
};
main();
I am fully aware this is one of those face palm errors, but help would nevertheless be appreciated, cheers!
Change this:
function generate_map(radius) {
...to this:
this.generate_map = function(radius) {
Edit: there are actually more issues than I at first realized.... :)
A few other tips:
First, I would recommend changing:
var Tile = function (x, y, z) {
...to simply be:
function Tile(x, y, z) {
(the same goes for Map). Your current solution works fine, but it's not very idiomatic, and until ES6 there was nothing in the spec that would cause var Tile = function to cause the resulting function's 'name' property to be set to "Tile", which is useful when it comes to debugging. I recently wrote another answer that delves a bit more into the differences between, e.g., function Foo() {} and var Foo = function() {}.
Second, you probably want to rename Map to something else. Map is a core part of ES6 now (https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/Map).
Third, even though you can create your generate_map function using this.generate_map, you may want to move it to the Map's prototype. Also, since you need to expose the grid value, you want to store it as a property, rather than a local variable scoped to the NewMapName constructor. E.g.,:
function NewMapName() {
this.grid = [];
}
NewMapName.prototype.generateMap = function(radius) {
// you can access the grid here via `this.grid`
...
};
By moving it to the prototype, that means all instances of NewMapName will share the same function reference, rather than it being created over-and-over-and-over (although maybe you really only create it once? Either way, it's more idiomatic, at a minimum). Note that I took some liberties with the "camelCasing" here (see the last point).
Fourth, your generateMap implementation is leaking some global variables (width and r, since you don't declare them with var). I would change that to this:
NewMapName.prototype.generateMap = function(radius) {
for (var width = -radius; width <= radius; width++) {
var r1 = Math.max(-radius, -width - radius);
var r2 = Math.min(radius, -width + radius);
for (var r = r1; r <= r2; r++) {
grid.push(new Tile(width, r, -width - r));
}
}
};
Fifth, your loop is kind of broken. I would refactor that as follows:
var main = function () {
var basicMap = new NewMapName();
basicMap.generateMap(3);
basicMap.grid.forEach(function(tile) {
console.log(tile.x, tile.y, tile.z);
});
};
main();
Lastly, and probably most minor, is that in JavaScript-land, camelCase is far more dominant that snake_case, so generate_map might be "better" as generateMap.
This question already has answers here:
Javascript: operator overloading
(9 answers)
Overloading Arithmetic Operators in JavaScript?
(11 answers)
Closed 7 years ago.
Is it possible to define custom operators between instances of a type in JavaScript?
For example, given that I have a custom vector class, is it possible to use
vect1 == vect2
to check for equality, whilst the underlying code would be something like this?
operator ==(a, b) {
return a.x == b.x && a.y == b.y && a.z == b.z;
}
(This is nonsense of course.)
I agree that the equal function on the vector prototype is the best solution. Note that you can also build other infix-like operators via chaining.
function Vector(x, y, z) {
this.x = x;
this.y = y;
this.z = z;
}
Vector.prototype.add = function (v2) {
var v = new Vector(this.x + v2.x,
this.y + v2.y,
this.z + v2.z);
return v;
}
Vector.prototype.equal = function (v2) {
return this.x == v2.x && this.y == v2.y && this.z == v2.z;
}
You can see online sample here.
Update: Here's a more extensive sample of creating a Factory function that supports chaining.
No, JavaScript doesn’t support operator overloading. You will need to write a method that does this:
Vector.prototype.equalTo = function(other) {
if (!(other instanceof Vector)) return false;
return a.x == b.x && a.y == b.y && a.z == b.z;
}
Then you can use that method like:
vect1.equalTo(vect2)
The best you can do if you want to stick with the == operator:
function Vector(x, y, z) {
this.x = x;
this.y = y;
this.z = z;
}
Vector.prototype.toString = function () {
return this.x + ";" + this.y + ";" + this.z;
};
var a = new Vector(1, 2, 3);
var b = new Vector(1, 2, 3);
var c = new Vector(4, 5, 6);
alert( String(a) == b ); // true
alert( String(a) == c ); // false
alert( a == b + "" ); // true again (no object wrapper but a bit more ugly)
No, it's not part of the spec (which doesn't mean that there aren't some hacks).
You can change built-in methods of objects in JavaScript, such as valueOf() method. For any two objects to apply the following operators >, <, <=, >=, -, + JavaScript takes the property valueOf() of each object, so it deals with operators kind of like this: obj1.valueOf() == obj2.valueOf() (this does behind the scenes). You can overwrite the valueOf() method depends on your needs. So for example:
var Person = function(age, name){
this.age = age;
this.name = name;
}
Person.prototype.valueOf(){
return this.age;
}
var p1 = new Person(20, "Bob"),
p2 = new Person(30, "Bony");
console.log(p1 > p2); //false
console.log(p1 < p2); //true
console.log(p2 - p1); //10
console.log(p2 + p1); //40
//for == you should the following
console.log(p2 >= p1 && p2 <= p1); // false
So this is not the precise answer for your question, but I think this can be an useful stuff for that kind of issues.
It isn't a direct answer for you question but it's worth to note.
PaperScript is a simple extension of JavaScript that adds support for operator overloading to any object.
It used for for making Vector graphics on top of HTML5 Canvas.
It parse PaperScript to JavaScript on script tag with type="text/paperscript":
<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<!-- Load the Paper.js library -->
<script type="text/javascript" src="js/paper.js"></script>
<!-- Define inlined PaperScript associate it with myCanvas -->
<script type="text/paperscript" canvas="myCanvas">
// Define a point to start with
var point1 = new Point(10, 20);
// Create a second point that is 4 times the first one.
// This is the same as creating a new point with x and y
// of point1 multiplied by 4:
var point2 = point1 * 4;
console.log(point2); // { x: 40, y: 80 }
// Now we calculate the difference between the two.
var point3 = point2 - point1;
console.log(point3); // { x: 30, y: 60 }
// Create yet another point, with a numeric value added to point3:
var point4 = point3 + 30;
console.log(point4); // { x: 60, y: 90 }
// How about a third of that?
var point5 = point4 / 3;
console.log(point5); // { x: 20, y: 30 }
// Multiplying two points with each other multiplies each
// coordinate seperately
var point6 = point5 * new Point(3, 2);
console.log(point6); // { x: 60, y: 60 }
var point7 = new Point(10, 20);
var point8 = point7 + { x: 100, y: 100 };
console.log(point8); // { x: 110, y: 120 }
// Adding size objects to points work too,
// forcing them to be converted to a point first
var point9 = point8 + new Size(50, 100);
console.log(point9); // { x: 160, y: 220 }
// And using the object notation for size works just as well:
var point10 = point9 + { width: 40, height: 80 };
console.log(point10); // { x: 200, y: 300 }
// How about adding a point in array notation instead?
var point5 = point10 + [100, 0];
console.log(point5); // { x: 300, y: 300 }
</script>
</head>
<body>
<canvas id="myCanvas" resize></canvas>
</body>
</html>
Here is a simple emulation which tests for equality using the guard operator:
function operator(node)
{
// Abstract the guard operator
var guard = " && ";
// Abstract the return statement
var action = "return ";
// return a function which compares two vector arguments
return Function("a,b", action + "a.x" + node + "b.x" + guard + "a.y" + node + "b.y" + guard + "a.z" + node + "a.z" );
}
//Pass equals to operator; pass vectors to returned Function
var foo = operator("==")({"x":1,"y":2,"z":3},{"x":1,"y":2,"z":3});
var bar = operator("==")({"x":1,"y":2,"z":3},{"x":4,"y":5,"z":6});
//Result
console.log(["foo",foo,"bar",bar]);
For non-strict mode functions the array index (defined in 15.4) named data properties of an arguments object whose numeric name values are less than the number of formal parameters of the corresponding function object initially share their values with the corresponding argument bindings in the function’s execution context. This means that changing the property changes the corresponding value of the argument binding and vice-versa. This correspondence is broken if such a property is deleted and then redefined or if the property is changed into an accessor property. For strict mode functions, the values of the arguments object‘s properties are simply a copy of the arguments passed to the function and there is no dynamic linkage between the property values and the formal parameter values.
References
The `arguments` object changes if parameters change
Annotated ES5: The Arguments Object
Javascript check arguments for zero value