Develop Reference

JavaScript: Randomly select a limited number of objects from an array to be placed into a second array? [duplicate]

I am working on 'how to access elements randomly from an array in javascript'. I found many links regarding this. Like:
Get random item from JavaScript array
var item = items[Math.floor(Math.random()*items.length)];
But in this, we can choose only one item from the array. If we want more than one elements then how can we achieve this? How can we get more than one element from an array?

Just two lines :
// Shuffle array
const shuffled = array.sort(() => 0.5 - Math.random());
// Get sub-array of first n elements after shuffled
let selected = shuffled.slice(0, n);
DEMO:

Try this non-destructive (and fast) function:
function getRandom(arr, n) {
var result = new Array(n),
len = arr.length,
taken = new Array(len);
if (n > len)
throw new RangeError("getRandom: more elements taken than available");
while (n--) {
var x = Math.floor(Math.random() * len);
result[n] = arr[x in taken ? taken[x] : x];
taken[x] = --len in taken ? taken[len] : len;
}
return result;
}

There is a one-liner unique solution here
array.sort(() => Math.random() - Math.random()).slice(0, n)

lodash _.sample and _.sampleSize.
Gets one or n random elements at unique keys from collection up to the size of collection.
_.sample([1, 2, 3, 4]);
// => 2
_.sampleSize([1, 2, 3], 2);
// => [3, 1]
_.sampleSize([1, 2, 3], 3);
// => [2, 3, 1]

Getting 5 random items without changing the original array:
const n = 5;
const sample = items
.map(x => ({ x, r: Math.random() }))
.sort((a, b) => a.r - b.r)
.map(a => a.x)
.slice(0, n);
(Don't use this for big lists)

create a funcion which does that:
var getMeRandomElements = function(sourceArray, neededElements) {
var result = [];
for (var i = 0; i < neededElements; i++) {
result.push(sourceArray[Math.floor(Math.random()*sourceArray.length)]);
}
return result;
}
you should also check if the sourceArray has enough elements to be returned. and if you want unique elements returned, you should remove selected element from the sourceArray.

Porting .sample from the Python standard library:
function sample(population, k){
/*
Chooses k unique random elements from a population sequence or set.
Returns a new list containing elements from the population while
leaving the original population unchanged. The resulting list is
in selection order so that all sub-slices will also be valid random
samples. This allows raffle winners (the sample) to be partitioned
into grand prize and second place winners (the subslices).
Members of the population need not be hashable or unique. If the
population contains repeats, then each occurrence is a possible
selection in the sample.
To choose a sample in a range of integers, use range as an argument.
This is especially fast and space efficient for sampling from a
large population: sample(range(10000000), 60)
Sampling without replacement entails tracking either potential
selections (the pool) in a list or previous selections in a set.
When the number of selections is small compared to the
population, then tracking selections is efficient, requiring
only a small set and an occasional reselection. For
a larger number of selections, the pool tracking method is
preferred since the list takes less space than the
set and it doesn't suffer from frequent reselections.
*/
if(!Array.isArray(population))
throw new TypeError("Population must be an array.");
var n = population.length;
if(k < 0 || k > n)
throw new RangeError("Sample larger than population or is negative");
var result = new Array(k);
var setsize = 21; // size of a small set minus size of an empty list
if(k > 5)
setsize += Math.pow(4, Math.ceil(Math.log(k * 3) / Math.log(4)))
if(n <= setsize){
// An n-length list is smaller than a k-length set
var pool = population.slice();
for(var i = 0; i < k; i++){ // invariant: non-selected at [0,n-i)
var j = Math.random() * (n - i) | 0;
result[i] = pool[j];
pool[j] = pool[n - i - 1]; // move non-selected item into vacancy
}
}else{
var selected = new Set();
for(var i = 0; i < k; i++){
var j = Math.random() * n | 0;
while(selected.has(j)){
j = Math.random() * n | 0;
}
selected.add(j);
result[i] = population[j];
}
}
return result;
}
Implementation ported from Lib/random.py.
Notes:
setsize is set based on characteristics in Python for efficiency. Although it has not been adjusted for JavaScript, the algorithm will still function as expected.
Some other answers described in this page are not safe according to the ECMAScript specification due to the misuse of Array.prototype.sort. This algorithm however is guaranteed to terminate in finite time.
For older browsers that do not have Set implemented, the set can be replaced with an Array and .has(j) replaced with .indexOf(j) > -1.
Performance against the accepted answer:
https://jsperf.com/pick-random-elements-from-an-array
The performance difference is the greatest on Safari.

If you want to randomly get items from the array in a loop without repetitions you can remove the selected item from the array with splice:
var items = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5];
var newItems = [];
for (var i = 0; i < 3; i++) {
var idx = Math.floor(Math.random() * items.length);
newItems.push(items[idx]);
items.splice(idx, 1);
}
console.log(newItems);

ES6 syntax
const pickRandom = (arr,count) => {
let _arr = [...arr];
return[...Array(count)].map( ()=> _arr.splice(Math.floor(Math.random() * _arr.length), 1)[0] );
}

I can't believe that no one didn't mention this method, pretty clean and straightforward.
const getRnd = (a, n) => new Array(n).fill(null).map(() => a[Math.floor(Math.random() * a.length)]);

Array.prototype.getnkill = function() {
var a = Math.floor(Math.random()*this.length);
var dead = this[a];
this.splice(a,1);
return dead;
}
//.getnkill() removes element in the array
//so if you like you can keep a copy of the array first:
//var original= items.slice(0);
var item = items.getnkill();
var anotheritem = items.getnkill();

Here's a nicely typed version. It doesn't fail. Returns a shuffled array if sample size is larger than original array's length.
function sampleArr<T>(arr: T[], size: number): T[] {
const setOfIndexes = new Set<number>();
while (setOfIndexes.size < size && setOfIndexes.size < arr.length) {
setOfIndexes.add(randomIntFromInterval(0, arr.length - 1));
}
return Array.from(setOfIndexes.values()).map(i => arr[i]);
}
const randomIntFromInterval = (min: number, max: number): number =>
Math.floor(Math.random() * (max - min + 1) + min);

In this answer, I want to share with you the test that I have to know the best method that gives equal chances for all elements to have random subarray.
Method 01
array.sort(() => Math.random() - Math.random()).slice(0, n)
using this method, some elements have higher chances comparing with others.
calculateProbability = function(number=0 ,iterations=10000,arraySize=100) {
let occ = 0
for (let index = 0; index < iterations; index++) {
const myArray= Array.from(Array(arraySize).keys()) //=> [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, ... arraySize]
/** Wrong Method */
const arr = myArray.sort(function() {
return val= .5 - Math.random();
});
if(arr[0]===number) {
occ ++
}
}
console.log("Probability of ",number, " = ",occ*100 /iterations,"%")
}
calculateProbability(0)
calculateProbability(0)
calculateProbability(0)
calculateProbability(50)
calculateProbability(50)
calculateProbability(50)
calculateProbability(25)
calculateProbability(25)
calculateProbability(25)
Method 2
Using this method, the elements have the same probability:
const arr = myArray
.map((a) => ({sort: Math.random(), value: a}))
.sort((a, b) => a.sort - b.sort)
.map((a) => a.value)
calculateProbability = function(number=0 ,iterations=10000,arraySize=100) {
let occ = 0
for (let index = 0; index < iterations; index++) {
const myArray= Array.from(Array(arraySize).keys()) //=> [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, ... arraySize]
/** Correct Method */
const arr = myArray
.map((a) => ({sort: Math.random(), value: a}))
.sort((a, b) => a.sort - b.sort)
.map((a) => a.value)
if(arr[0]===number) {
occ ++
}
}
console.log("Probability of ",number, " = ",occ*100 /iterations,"%")
}
calculateProbability(0)
calculateProbability(0)
calculateProbability(0)
calculateProbability(50)
calculateProbability(50)
calculateProbability(50)
calculateProbability(25)
calculateProbability(25)
calculateProbability(25)
The correct answer is posted in in the following link: https://stackoverflow.com/a/46545530/3811640

2020
non destructive functional programing style, working in a immutable context.
const _randomslice = (ar, size) => {
let new_ar = [...ar];
new_ar.splice(Math.floor(Math.random()*ar.length),1);
return ar.length <= (size+1) ? new_ar : _randomslice(new_ar, size);
}
console.log(_randomslice([1,2,3,4,5],2));

EDIT: This solution is slower than others presented here (which splice the source array) if you want to get only a few elements. The speed of this solution depends only on the number of elements in the original array, while the speed of the splicing solution depends on the number of elements required in the output array.
If you want non-repeating random elements, you can shuffle your array then get only as many as you want:
function shuffle(array) {
var counter = array.length, temp, index;
// While there are elements in the array
while (counter--) {
// Pick a random index
index = (Math.random() * counter) | 0;
// And swap the last element with it
temp = array[counter];
array[counter] = array[index];
array[index] = temp;
}
return array;
}
var arr = [0,1,2,3,4,5,7,8,9];
var randoms = shuffle(arr.slice(0)); // array is cloned so it won't be destroyed
randoms.length = 4; // get 4 random elements
DEMO: http://jsbin.com/UHUHuqi/1/edit
Shuffle function taken from here: https://stackoverflow.com/a/6274398/1669279

I needed a function to solve this kind of issue so I'm sharing it here.
const getRandomItem = function(arr) {
return arr[Math.floor(Math.random() * arr.length)];
}
// original array
let arr = [4, 3, 1, 6, 9, 8, 5];
// number of random elements to get from arr
let n = 4;
let count = 0;
// new array to push random item in
let randomItems = []
do {
let item = getRandomItem(arr);
randomItems.push(item);
// update the original array and remove the recently pushed item
arr.splice(arr.indexOf(item), 1);
count++;
} while(count < n);
console.log(randomItems);
console.log(arr);
Note: if n = arr.length then basically you're shuffling the array arr and randomItems returns that shuffled array.
Demo

Here's an optimized version of the code ported from Python by #Derek, with the added destructive (in-place) option that makes it the fastest algorithm possible if you can go with it. Otherwise it either makes a full copy or, for a small number of items requested from a large array, switches to a selection-based algorithm.
// Chooses k unique random elements from pool.
function sample(pool, k, destructive) {
var n = pool.length;
if (k < 0 || k > n)
throw new RangeError("Sample larger than population or is negative");
if (destructive || n <= (k <= 5 ? 21 : 21 + Math.pow(4, Math.ceil(Math.log(k*3) / Math.log(4))))) {
if (!destructive)
pool = Array.prototype.slice.call(pool);
for (var i = 0; i < k; i++) { // invariant: non-selected at [i,n)
var j = i + Math.random() * (n - i) | 0;
var x = pool[i];
pool[i] = pool[j];
pool[j] = x;
}
pool.length = k; // truncate
return pool;
} else {
var selected = new Set();
while (selected.add(Math.random() * n | 0).size < k) {}
return Array.prototype.map.call(selected, i => pool[i]);
}
}
In comparison to Derek's implementation, the first algorithm is much faster in Firefox while being a bit slower in Chrome, although now it has the destructive option - the most performant one. The second algorithm is simply 5-15% faster. I try not to give any concrete numbers since they vary depending on k and n and probably won't mean anything in the future with the new browser versions.
The heuristic that makes the choice between algorithms originates from Python code. I've left it as is, although it sometimes selects the slower one. It should be optimized for JS, but it's a complex task since the performance of corner cases is browser- and their version-dependent. For example, when you try to select 20 out of 1000 or 1050, it will switch to the first or the second algorithm accordingly. In this case the first one runs 2x faster than the second one in Chrome 80 but 3x slower in Firefox 74.

Sampling with possible duplicates:
const sample_with_duplicates = Array(sample_size).fill().map(() => items[~~(Math.random() * items.length)])
Sampling without duplicates:
const sample_without_duplicates = [...Array(items.length).keys()].sort(() => 0.5 - Math.random()).slice(0, sample_size).map(index => items[index]);
Since without duplicates requires sorting the whole index array first, it is considerably slow than with possible duplicates for big items input arrays.
Obviously, the max size of without duplicates is <= items.length
Check this fiddle: https://jsfiddle.net/doleron/5zw2vequ/30/

It extracts random elements from srcArray one by one while it get's enough or there is no more elements in srcArray left for extracting.
Fast and reliable.
function getNRandomValuesFromArray(srcArr, n) {
// making copy to do not affect original srcArray
srcArr = srcArr.slice();
resultArr = [];
// while srcArray isn't empty AND we didn't enough random elements
while (srcArr.length && resultArr.length < n) {
// remove one element from random position and add this element to the result array
resultArr = resultArr.concat( // merge arrays
srcArr.splice( // extract one random element
Math.floor(Math.random() * srcArr.length),
1
)
);
}
return resultArr;
}

Here's a function I use that allows you to easily sample an array with or without replacement:
// Returns a random sample (either with or without replacement) from an array
const randomSample = (arr, k, withReplacement = false) => {
let sample;
if (withReplacement === true) { // sample with replacement
sample = Array.from({length: k}, () => arr[Math.floor(Math.random() * arr.length)]);
} else { // sample without replacement
if (k > arr.length) {
throw new RangeError('Sample size must be less than or equal to array length when sampling without replacement.')
}
sample = arr.map(a => [a, Math.random()]).sort((a, b) => {
return a[1] < b[1] ? -1 : 1;}).slice(0, k).map(a => a[0]);
};
return sample;
};
Using it is simple:
Without Replacement (default behavior)
randomSample([1, 2, 3], 2) may return [2, 1]
With Replacement
randomSample([1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6], 4) may return [2, 3, 3, 2]

var getRandomElements = function(sourceArray, requiredLength) {
var result = [];
while(result.length<requiredLength){
random = Math.floor(Math.random()*sourceArray.length);
if(result.indexOf(sourceArray[random])==-1){
result.push(sourceArray[random]);
}
}
return result;
}

const items = ['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', 1, 2, 3, 4, 5];
const fetchRandomArray = ({pool=[], limit=1})=>{
let query = []
let selectedIndices = {}
while(query.length < limit){
const index = Math.floor(Math.random()*pool.length)
if(typeof(selectedIndices[index])==='undefined'){
query.push(items[index])
selectedIndices[index] = index
}
}
console.log(fetchRandomArray({pool:items, limit:10})

2019
This is same as Laurynas Mališauskas answer, just that the elements are unique (no duplicates).
var getMeRandomElements = function(sourceArray, neededElements) {
var result = [];
for (var i = 0; i < neededElements; i++) {
var index = Math.floor(Math.random() * sourceArray.length);
result.push(sourceArray[index]);
sourceArray.splice(index, 1);
}
return result;
}
Now to answer original question "How to get multiple random elements by jQuery", here you go:
var getMeRandomElements = function(sourceArray, neededElements) {
var result = [];
for (var i = 0; i < neededElements; i++) {
var index = Math.floor(Math.random() * sourceArray.length);
result.push(sourceArray[index]);
sourceArray.splice(index, 1);
}
return result;
}
var $set = $('.someClass');// <<<<< change this please
var allIndexes = [];
for(var i = 0; i < $set.length; ++i) {
allIndexes.push(i);
}
var totalRandom = 4;// <<<<< change this please
var randomIndexes = getMeRandomElements(allIndexes, totalRandom);
var $randomElements = null;
for(var i = 0; i < randomIndexes.length; ++i) {
var randomIndex = randomIndexes[i];
if($randomElements === null) {
$randomElements = $set.eq(randomIndex);
} else {
$randomElements.add($set.eq(randomIndex));
}
}
// $randomElements is ready
$randomElements.css('backgroundColor', 'red');

Here is the most correct answer and it will give you Random + Unique elements.
function randomize(array, n)
{
var final = [];
array = array.filter(function(elem, index, self) {
return index == self.indexOf(elem);
}).sort(function() { return 0.5 - Math.random() });
var len = array.length,
n = n > len ? len : n;
for(var i = 0; i < n; i ++)
{
final[i] = array[i];
}
return final;
}
// randomize([1,2,3,4,5,3,2], 4);
// Result: [1, 2, 3, 5] // Something like this

items.sort(() => (Math.random() > 0.5 ? 1 : -1)).slice(0, count);

Checking whether the number of unique numbers within array exceeds n

Just as title reads, I need to check whether the number of unique entries within array exceeds n.
Array.prototype.some() seems to fit perfectly here, as it will stop cycling through the array right at the moment, positive answer is found, so, please, do not suggest the methods that filter out non-unique records and measure the length of resulting dataset as performance matters here.
So far, I use the following code, to check if there's more than n=2 unique numbers:
const res = [1,1,2,1,1,3,1,1,4,1].some((e,_,s,n=2) => s.indexOf(e) != s.lastIndexOf(e) ? false : n-- ? false : true);
console.log(res);
.as-console-wrapper { min-height: 100%}
And it returns false while there's, obviously 3 unique numbers (2,3,4).
Your help to figure out what's my (stupid) mistake here is much appreciated.
p.s. I'm looking for a pure JS solution

You can use a Map() with array values as map keys and count as values. Then iterate over map values to find the count of unique numbers. If count exceeds the limit return true, if not return false.
Time complexity is O(n). It can't get better than O(n) because every number in the array must be visited to find the count of unique numbers.
var data = [1, 1, 2, 1, 1, 3, 1, 1, 4, 1];
function exceedsUniqueLimit(limit) {
var map = new Map();
for (let value of data) {
const count = map.get(value);
if (count) {
map.set(value, count + 1);
} else {
map.set(value, 1);
}
}
var uniqueNumbers = 0;
for (let count of map.values()) {
if (count === 1) {
uniqueNumbers++;
}
if (uniqueNumbers > limit) {
return true;
}
}
return false;
}
console.log(exceedsUniqueLimit(2));

To know if a value is unique or duplicate, the whole array needs to be scanned at least once (Well, on a very large array there could be a test to see how many elements there is left to scan, but the overhead for this kind of test will make it slower)
This version uses two Set
function uniqueLimit(data,limit) {
let
dup = new Set(),
unique = new Set(),
value = null;
for (let i = 0, len = data.length; i < len; ++i) {
value = data[i];
if ( dup.has(value) ) continue;
if ( unique.has(value) ) {
dup.add(value);
unique.delete(value);
continue;
}
unique.add(value);
}
return unique.size > limit;
}
I also tried this version, using arrays:
function uniqueLimit(data, limit) {
let unique=[], dup = [];
for (let idx = 0, len = data.length; idx < len; ++idx) {
const value = data[idx];
if ( dup.indexOf(value) >= 0 ) continue;
const pos = unique.indexOf(value); // get position of value
if ( pos >= 0 ) {
unique.splice(pos,1); // remove value
dup.push(value);
continue;
}
unique.push(value);
}
return unique.length > limit;
};
I tested several of the solutions in this thread, and you can find the result here. If there are only a few unique values, the method by using arrays is the fastest, but if there are many unique values it quickly becomes the slowest, and on large arrays slowest by several magnitudes.
More profiling
I did some more tests with node v12.10.0. The results are normalized after the fastest method for each test.
Worst case scenario: 1000000 entries, all unique:
Set 1.00 // See this answer
Map 1.26 // See answer by Nikhil
Reduce 1.44 // See answer by Bali Balo
Array Infinity // See this answer
Best case scenario: 1000000 entries, all the same:
Array 1.00
Set 1.16
Map 2.60
Reduce 3.43
Question test case: [1, 1, 2, 1, 1, 3, 1, 1, 4, 1]
Array 1.00
Map 1.29
Set 1.47
Reduce 4.25
Another test case: [1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,2,1,1,1,1,
1,1,1,1,1,1,1,3,4,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,2,1,1,1,
1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,
1,1,1,1,1,1,1,5 ]
Array 1.00
Set 1.13
Map 2.24
Reduce 2.39
Conclusion
The method that uses Set works for both small and large arrays, and performs well regardless of if there are many unique values or not. The version that are using arrays can be faster if there are few unique values, but quickly becomes very slow if there are many unique values.

Using sets, We count hypothetical unique set size and duplicateSet size and delete unique set element for each duplicate found. If unique set size goes below n, we stop iterating.
function uniqueGtN(res, n) {
let uniqSet = new Set(res);
let max = uniqSet.size;
if (max <= n) return false;
let dupSet = new Set();
return !res.some(e => {
if (dupSet.has(e)) {
if (uniqSet.has(e)) {
uniqSet.delete(e);
console.log(...uniqSet);
return (--max <= n);
}
} else {
dupSet.add(e);
}
});
}
console.log(uniqueGtN([1, 1, 2, 1, 1, 3, 3, 1], 2));

From your original solution, I have changed few things, it seems to be working fine:
(function() {
const array = [1,1,2,1,1,3,1,1,4,1];
function hasExceedingUniqueNumber(array, number) {
return array.some((e,_,s,n=number) => {
let firstIndex = s.indexOf(e);
let lastIndex = s.lastIndexOf(e);
// NOT unique
if (firstIndex != lastIndex) {
return false;
}
// unique
return e > n;
});
}
console.log('1', hasExceedingUniqueNumber(array, 1));
console.log('2', hasExceedingUniqueNumber(array, 2));
console.log('3', hasExceedingUniqueNumber(array, 3));
console.log('4', hasExceedingUniqueNumber(array, 4));
})();
So the shorter version looks like this:
(function() {
const array = [1,1,2,1,1,3,1,1,4,1];
function hasExceedingUniqueNumber(array, number) {
return array.some((e,_,s,n=number) => s.indexOf(e) != s.lastIndexOf(e) ? false : e > n);
}
console.log('1', hasExceedingUniqueNumber(array, 1));
console.log('2', hasExceedingUniqueNumber(array, 2));
console.log('3', hasExceedingUniqueNumber(array, 3));
console.log('4', hasExceedingUniqueNumber(array, 4));
})();

The code listed in your question does not work because m is not shared across the calls to the some callback function. It is a parameter, and its value is 2 at each iteration.
To fix this, either put m outside, or use the thisArg of the some function (but that means you can't use an arrow function)
let m = 2;
const res = [1,1,1,2,1,1,3,1,1,1,4,1,1]
.sort((a,b) => a-b)
.some((n,i,s) => i > 0 && n == s[i-1] ? !(m--) : false);
// ----- or -----
const res = [1,1,1,2,1,1,3,1,1,1,4,1,1]
.sort((a,b) => a-b)
.some(function(n,i,s) { return i > 0 && n == s[i-1] ? !(this.m--) : false; }, { m: 2 });
Note: this code seems to count if the number of duplicates exceeds a certain value, not the number of unique values.
As another side note, I know you mentioned you did not want to use a duplicate removal algorithm, but performant ones (for example hash-based) would result in something close to O(n).
Here is a solution to count all the values appearing exactly once in the initial array. It is a bit obfuscated and hard to read, but you seem to be wanting something concise. It is the most performant I can think of, using 2 objects to store values seen at least once and the ones seen multiple times:
let res = [1,1,2,3,4].reduce((l, e) => (l[+!l[1][e]][e] = true, l), [{},{}]).map(o => Object.keys(o).length).reduce((more,once) => once-more) > 2;
Here is the less minified version for people who don't like the short version:
let array = [1,1,2,3,4];
let counts = array.reduce((counts, element) => {
if (!counts.atLeastOne[element]) {
counts.atLeastOne[element] = true;
} else {
counts.moreThanOne[element] = true;
}
return counts;
}, { atLeastOne: {}, moreThanOne: {} });
let exactlyOnceCount = Object.keys(counts.atLeastOne).length - Object.keys(counts.moreThanOne).length;
let isOverLimit = exactlyOnceCount > 2;

Whenever I have a type of problem like this, I always like to peek at how the underscore JS folks have done it.
[Ed again: removed _.countBy as it isn't relevant to the answer]
Use the _.uniq function to return a list of unique values in the array:
var u = _.uniq([1,1,2,2,2,3,4,5,5]); // [1,2,3,4,5]
if (u.length > n) { ...};
[ed:] Here's how we might use that implementation to write our own, opposite function that returns only non-unique collection items
function nonUnique(array) {
var result = [];
var seen = [];
for (var i = 0, length = array.length; i < length; i++) {
var value = array[i];
if (seen.indexOf(value) === -1) { // warning! naive assumption
seen.push(value);
} else {
result.push(value);
}
}
console.log("non-unique result", result);
return result;
};
function hasMoreThanNUnique(array, threshold) {
var uArr = nonUnique(array);
var accum = 0;
for (var i = 0; i < array.length; i++) {
var val = array[i];
if (uArr.indexOf(val) === -1) {
accum++;
}
if (accum > threshold) return true;
}
return false;
}
var testArrA = [1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 3, 4, 5]; // unique values: [3, 4, 5]
var testArrB = [1, 1, 1, 1, 4]; // [4]
var testResultsA = hasMoreThanNUnique(testArrA, 3)
console.log("testArrA and results", testResultsA);
var testResultsB = hasMoreThanNUnique(testArrB, 3);
console.log("testArrB and results", testResultsB);

So far, I came up with the following:
const countNum = [1,1,1,2,1,1,3,1,1,1,4,1,1].reduce((r,n) => (r[n]=(r[n]||0)+1, r), {});
const res = Object.entries(countNum).some(([n,q]) => q == 1 ? !(m--) : false, m=2);
console.log(res);
.as-console-wrapper{min-height:100%}
But I don't really like array->object->array conversion about that. Is there a faster and (at the same time compact) solution?

An algorithm to find the closest values in javascript array

I'm working on a small algorithm to find the closest values of a given number in an random array of numbers. In my case I'm trying to detect connected machines identified by a 6-digit number ID ("123456", "0078965", ...) but it can be useful for example to find the closest geolocated users around me.
What I need is to list the 5 closest machines, no matter if their IDs are higher or lower. This code works perfectly but I'm looking for a smarter and better way to proceed, amha I got to much loops and arrays.
let n = 0; // counter
let m = 5; // number of final machines to find
// list of IDs founded (unordered: we can't decide)
const arr = ["087965","258369","885974","0078965","457896","998120","698745","399710","357984","698745","789456"]
let NUM = "176789" // the random NUM to test
const temp = [];
const diff = {};
let result = null;
// list the [m] highest founded (5 IDs)
for(i=0 ; i<arr.length; i++) {
if(arr[i] > NUM) {
for(j=0 ; j<m; j++) {
temp.push(arr[i+j]);
} break;
}
}
// list the [m] lowest founded (5 IDs)
for(i=arr.length ; i>=0; i--) {
if(arr[i] < NUM) {
for(j=m ; j>=0; j--) {
temp.push(arr[i-j]);
} break;
}
}
// now we are certain to get at least 5 IDs even if NUM is 999999 or 000000
temp.sort(function(a, b){return a - b}); // increase order
for(i=0 ; i<(m*2); i++) {
let difference = Math.abs(NUM - temp[i]);
diff[difference] = temp[i]; // [ 20519 : "964223" ]
}
// we now get a 10-values "temp" array ordered by difference
// list the [m] first IDs:
for(key in diff){
if(n < m){
let add = 6-diff[key].toString().length;
let zer = '0'.repeat(add);
let id = zer+diff[key]; // "5802" -> "005802"
result += (n+1)+":"+ id +" ";
n+=1;
}
}
alert(result);
-> "1:0078965 2:087965 3:258369 4:357984 5:399710" for "176789"

You actually don't need to have so many different iterations. All you need is to loop twice:
The first iteration attempt is to use .map() to create an array of objects that stores the ID and the absolute difference between the ID and num
The second iteration attempt is simply to use .sort() through the array of objects created in step 1, ranking them from lowest to highest difference
Once the second iteration is done, you simply use .slice(0, 5) to get the first 5 objects in the array, which now contains the smallest 5 diffs. Iterate through it again if you want to simply extract the ID:
const arr = ["087965","258369","885974","078965","457896","998120","698745","399710","357984","698745","789456"];
let num = "176789";
let m = 5; // number of final machines to find
// Create an array of objects storing the original arr + diff from `num`
const diff = arr.map(item => {
return { id: item, diff: Math.abs(+item - +num) };
});
// Sort by difference from `num` (lowest to highest)
diff.sort((a, b) => a.diff - b.diff);
// Get the first m entries
const filteredArr = diff.slice(0, m).map(item => item.id).sort();
// Log
console.log(filteredArr);
// Completely optional, if you want to format it the way you have in your question
console.log(`"${filteredArr.map((v, i) => i + ": " + v).join(', ')}" for "${num}"`);

You could take an array as result set, fill it with the first n elements and sort it by the delta of the wanted value.
For all other elements check if the absolute delta of the actual item and the value is smaller then the last value of the result set and replace this value with the actual item. Sort again. Repeat until all elements are processed.
The result set is ordered by the smallest delta to the greatest by using the target value.
const
absDelta = (a, b) => Math.abs(a - b),
sortDelta = v => (a, b) => absDelta(a, v) - absDelta(b, v),
array = [087965, 258369, 885974, 0078965, 457896, 998120, 698745, 399710, 357984, 698745, 789456],
value = 176789,
n = 5,
result = array.reduce((r, v) => {
if (r.length < n) {
r.push(v);
r.sort(sortDelta(value));
return r;
}
if (absDelta(v, value) < absDelta(r[n - 1], value)) {
r[n - 1] = v;
r.sort(sortDelta(value));
}
return r;
}, []);
console.log(result); // sorted by closest value

A few good approaches so far, but I can't resist throwing in another.
This tests a sliding window of n elements in a sorted version of the array, and returns the one whose midpoint is closest to the value you're looking for. This is a pretty efficient approach (one sort of the array, and then a single pass through that) -- though it does not catch cases where there's more than one correct answer (see the last test case below).
const closestN = function(n, target, arr) {
// make sure we're not comparing strings, then sort:
let sorted = arr.map(Number).sort((a, b) => a - b);
target = Number(target);
let bestDiff = Infinity; // actual diff can be assumed to be lower than this
let bestSlice = 0; // until proven otherwise
for (var i = 0; i <= sorted.length - n; i++) {
let median = medianOf(sorted[i], sorted[i+n-1]) // midpoint of the group
let diff = Math.abs(target - median); // distance to the target
if (diff < bestDiff) { // we improved on the previous attempt
bestDiff = diff; // capture this for later comparisons
bestSlice = i;
}
// TODO handle diff == bestDiff? i.e. more than one possible correct answer
}
return sorted.slice(bestSlice, bestSlice + n)
}
// I cheated a bit here; this won't work if a > b:
const medianOf = function(a, b) {
return (Math.abs(b-a) / 2) + a
}
console.log(closestN(5, 176789, ["087965", "258369", "885974", "0078965", "457896", "998120", "698745", "399710", "357984", "698745", "789456"]))
// more test cases
console.log(closestN(3, 5, [1,2,5,8,9])) // should be 2,5,8
console.log(closestN(3, 4, [1,2,5,8,9])) // should be 1,2,5
console.log(closestN(1, 4, [1,2,5,8,9])) // should be 5
console.log(closestN(3, 99, [1,2,5,8,9])) // should be 5,8,9
console.log(closestN(3, -99, [1,2,5,8,9])) // should be 1,2,5
console.log(closestN(3, -2, [-10, -5, 0, 4])) // should be -5, 0, 4
console.log(closestN(1, 2, [1,3])) // either 1 or 3 would be correct...

javascript permutation generator with permutation length parameter

I've seen a few generators out there but they all make a squared matrix. For example, you give it a list of three items and it'll assume the output of the length is also three. However, I'd like to specify the items and the length.
Sound like an easy problem can't believe there isn't a library available for it. Would like to avoid writing this myself if there's a tested library out there. Any suggestions would be great.
Example of what i've found
var list = 'abc';
perms = permutations(list);
//you cannot define the length
Example
var list = 'abc';
var length = 3;
perms = permutations(list,length);
console.log(perms);
/* output
a,a,a
a,b,c
a,b,a
a,c,a
c,a,a
...
*/
I would like to be able to change length and should create permutations accordingly
length = 2
a,a
a,b
b,b
b,a
length = 4
a,a,a,a
a,a,a,b
....

You can imagine the length as representing the number of slots. Each slot has N possibilities, given that N is the number of elements in your initial list. So given three values [1,2,3], you will have a total of 3 x 3 x 3 = 27 permutations.
Here's my attempt. Comments included!
var list = [1,2,3];
var getPermutations = function(list, maxLen) {
// Copy initial values as arrays
var perm = list.map(function(val) {
return [val];
});
// Our permutation generator
var generate = function(perm, maxLen, currLen) {
// Reached desired length
if (currLen === maxLen) {
return perm;
}
// For each existing permutation
for (var i = 0, len = perm.length; i < len; i++) {
var currPerm = perm.shift();
// Create new permutation
for (var k = 0; k < list.length; k++) {
perm.push(currPerm.concat(list[k]));
}
}
// Recurse
return generate(perm, maxLen, currLen + 1);
};
// Start with size 1 because of initial values
return generate(perm, maxLen, 1);
};
var res = getPermutations(list, 3);
console.log(res);
console.log(res.length); // 27
fiddle

If you're looking for an answer based on performance, you can use the length of the array as a numerical base, and access the elements in the array based on this base, essentially replacing actual values from the base with the values in your array, and accessing each of the values in order, using a counter:
const getCombos = (arr, len) => {
const base = arr.length
const counter = Array(len).fill(base === 1 ? arr[0] : 0)
if (base === 1) return [counter]
const combos = []
const increment = i => {
if (counter[i] === base - 1) {
counter[i] = 0
increment(i - 1)
} else {
counter[i]++
}
}
for (let i = base ** len; i--;) {
const combo = []
for (let j = 0; j < counter.length; j++) {
combo.push(arr[counter[j]])
}
combos.push(combo)
increment(counter.length - 1)
}
return combos
}
const combos = getCombos([1, 2, 3], 3)
console.log(combos)
For smaller use cases, like the example above, performance shouldn't be an issue, but if you were to increase the size of the given array from 3 to 10, and the length from 3 to 5, you have already moved from 27 (33) combinations to 100,000 (105), you can see the performance difference here:

I wrote a little library that uses generators to give you permutations with custom items and number of elements. https://github.com/acarl005/generatorics
const G = require('generatorics')
for (let perm of G.permutation(['a', 'b', 'c'], 2)) {
console.log(perm);
}
// [ 'a', 'b' ]
// [ 'a', 'c' ]
// [ 'b', 'a' ]
// [ 'b', 'c' ]
// [ 'c', 'a' ]
// [ 'c', 'b' ]

Reordering arrays

Say, I have an array that looks like this:
var playlist = [
{artist:"Herbie Hancock", title:"Thrust"},
{artist:"Lalo Schifrin", title:"Shifting Gears"},
{artist:"Faze-O", title:"Riding High"}
];
How can I move an element to another position?
I want to move for example, {artist:"Lalo Schifrin", title:"Shifting Gears"} to the end.
I tried using splice, like this:
var tmp = playlist.splice(2,1);
playlist.splice(2,0,tmp);
But it doesn't work.

The syntax of Array.splice is:
yourArray.splice(index, howmany, element1, /*.....,*/ elementX);
Where:
index is the position in the array you want to start removing elements from
howmany is how many elements you want to remove from index
element1, ..., elementX are elements you want inserted from position index.
This means that splice() can be used to remove elements, add elements, or replace elements in an array, depending on the arguments you pass.
Note that it returns an array of the removed elements.
Something nice and generic would be:
Array.prototype.move = function (from, to) {
this.splice(to, 0, this.splice(from, 1)[0]);
};
Then just use:
var ar = [1,2,3,4,5];
ar.move(0,3);
alert(ar) // 2,3,4,1,5
Diagram:

If you know the indexes you could easily swap the elements, with a simple function like this:
function swapElement(array, indexA, indexB) {
var tmp = array[indexA];
array[indexA] = array[indexB];
array[indexB] = tmp;
}
swapElement(playlist, 1, 2);
// [{"artist":"Herbie Hancock","title":"Thrust"},
// {"artist":"Faze-O","title":"Riding High"},
// {"artist":"Lalo Schifrin","title":"Shifting Gears"}]
Array indexes are just properties of the array object, so you can swap its values.

With ES6 you can do something like this:
const swapPositions = (array, a ,b) => {
[array[a], array[b]] = [array[b], array[a]]
}
let array = [1,2,3,4,5];
swapPositions(array,0,1);
/// => [2, 1, 3, 4, 5]

Here is an immutable version for those who are interested:
function immutableMove(arr, from, to) {
return arr.reduce((prev, current, idx, self) => {
if (from === to) {
prev.push(current);
}
if (idx === from) {
return prev;
}
if (from < to) {
prev.push(current);
}
if (idx === to) {
prev.push(self[from]);
}
if (from > to) {
prev.push(current);
}
return prev;
}, []);
}

You could always use the sort method, if you don't know where the record is at present:
playlist.sort(function (a, b) {
return a.artist == "Lalo Schifrin"
? 1 // Move it down the list
: 0; // Keep it the same
});

Change 2 to 1 as the first parameter in the splice call when removing the element:
var tmp = playlist.splice(1, 1);
playlist.splice(2, 0, tmp[0]);

Immutable version, no side effects (doesn’t mutate original array):
const testArr = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5];
function move(from, to, arr) {
const newArr = [...arr];
const item = newArr.splice(from, 1)[0];
newArr.splice(to, 0, item);
return newArr;
}
console.log(move(3, 1, testArr));
// [1, 4, 2, 3, 5]
codepen: https://codepen.io/mliq/pen/KKNyJZr

EDIT: Please check out Andy's answer as his answer came first and this is solely an extension of his
I know this is an old question, but I think it's worth it to include Array.prototype.sort().
Here's an example from MDN along with the link
var numbers = [4, 2, 5, 1, 3];
numbers.sort(function(a, b) {
return a - b;
});
console.log(numbers);
// [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
Luckily it doesn't only work with numbers:
arr.sort([compareFunction])
compareFunction
Specifies a function that defines the sort order. If omitted, the array is sorted according to each character's Unicode code point value, according to the string conversion of each element.
I noticed that you're ordering them by first name:
let playlist = [
{artist:"Herbie Hancock", title:"Thrust"},
{artist:"Lalo Schifrin", title:"Shifting Gears"},
{artist:"Faze-O", title:"Riding High"}
];
// sort by name
playlist.sort((a, b) => {
if(a.artist < b.artist) { return -1; }
if(a.artist > b.artist) { return 1; }
// else names must be equal
return 0;
});
note that if you wanted to order them by last name you would have to either have a key for both first_name & last_name or do some regex magic, which I can't do XD
Hope that helps :)

Try this:
playlist = playlist.concat(playlist.splice(1, 1));

If you only ever want to move one item from an arbitrary position to the end of the array, this should work:
function toEnd(list, position) {
list.push(list.splice(position, 1));
return list;
}
If you want to move multiple items from some arbitrary position to the end, you can do:
function toEnd(list, from, count) {
list.push.apply(list, list.splice(from, count));
return list;
}
If you want to move multiple items from some arbitrary position to some arbitrary position, try:
function move(list, from, count, to) {
var args = [from > to ? to : to - count, 0];
args.push.apply(args, list.splice(from, count));
list.splice.apply(list, args);
return list;
}

Time complexity of all answers is O(n^2) because had used twice spice. But O(n/2) is possible.
Most Perfomance Solution:
Array with n elements,
x is to, y is from
should be n >x && n > y
time complexity should be |y - x|. So its is number of elements that is between from and to.
bestcase: O(1); //ex: from:4 to:5
average : O(n/2)
worthcase : O(n) //ex: from:0 to:n
function reOrder(from,to,arr) {
if(from == to || from < 0 || to < 0 ) { return arr};
var moveNumber = arr[from];
if(from < to) {
for(var i =from; i< to; i++){
arr[i] = arr[i+1]
}
}
else{
for(var i = from; i > to; i--){
arr[i] = arr[i-1];
}
}
arr[to] = moveNumber;
return arr;
}
var arr = [0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13];
console.log(reOrder(3,7,arr));

As a simple mutable solution you can call splice twice in a row:
playlist.splice(playlist.length - 1, 1, ...playlist.splice(INDEX_TO_MOVE, 1))
On the other hand, a simple inmutable solution could use slice since this method returns a copy of a section from the original array without changing it:
const copy = [...playlist.slice(0, INDEX_TO_MOVE - 1), ...playlist.slice(INDEX_TO_MOVE), ...playlist.slice(INDEX_TO_MOVE - 1, INDEX_TO_MOVE)]

I came here looking for a rearranging complete array, I want something like I did below, but found most of the answers for moving only one element from position A to position B.
Hope my answer will help someone here
function reArrangeArray(firstIndex=0,arr){
var a = [];
var b = []
for(let i = 0; i<= (arr.length-1); i++){
if(i<firstIndex){
a.push(arr[i])
}else{
b.push(arr[i])
}
}
return b.concat(a)
}
const arrayToRearrange = [{name: 'A'},{name: 'B'},{name: 'C'},{name: 'D'},{name: 'E'}];
reArrangeArray(2,arrayToRearrange)
// Output
// [
// { name: 'C' },
// { name: 'D' },
// { name: 'E' },
// { name: 'A' },
// { name: 'B' }
// ]

Reorder its work This Way
var tmpOrder = playlist[oldIndex];
playlist.splice(oldIndex, 1);
playlist.splice(newIndex, 0, tmpOrder);
I hope this will work