Develop Reference

Unsure about syntax/methods. I believe my code should work but it does not

Prompt: Given a positive integer num, return the sum of all odd Fibonacci numbers that are less than or equal to num. The first two numbers in the Fibonacci sequence are 1 and 1. Every additional number in the sequence is the sum of the two previous numbers. The first six numbers of the Fibonacci sequence are 1, 1, 2, 3, 5 and 8. For example, sumFibs(10) should return 10 because all odd Fibonacci numbers less than or equal to 10 are 1, 1, 3, and 5.
The code I wrote for this is:
function sumFibs(num) {
const arr = [1,1];
let sum = 0;
for(let i = 2; i <= num; i++){
let queef = arr[i - 1] + arr[i - 2];
arr.push(queef);
}
for(let j = 0; j < arr.length; j++){
if(arr[j] % 2 != 0){
sum += arr[j];
}
}
return sum;
}
console.log(sumFibs(6));
but i get 23 when it should be 10, I'm not sure why this doesn't work because i feel this would work in java. I have also tried to do arr[i] == queef but that also does not work. I am missing something or should this work?

I think your error relies in
for(let i = 2; i <= num; i++){
I believe you're generating an amount of numbers till num instead of the value itself. Try with something like this (I tried to keep your style):
function sumFibs(num) {
if (num === 1) return 1;
const arr = [1,1];
let sum = 2;
for(let i = 2; i <= num; i++){
let queef = arr[i - 1] + arr[i - 2];
arr.push(queef);
if(arr[i] % 2 != 0 && queef < num){
sum += arr[i];
}
}
return sum;
}
console.log(sumFibs(6));

Welcome Bethany, enjoy your new coding journey. If you change line 4 in your code to:
for(let i = 2; i < num; i++){
it returns 10

It should be < num in the first for loop. Since array indexes start from 0 and not 1, when you type <= 6 it makes an array with 7 numbers in it.

how to find two max numbers ( negative and positive ) in array?

I'm looking for best solution to solve this problem
Problem:
Create a function named ArrayChallenge (Javascript) which accepts a single argument "arr" which is an array of numbers. This function will return the string true if any two numbers can be multiplied so that the answer is greater than double the sum of all the elements in the array. If not, return the string false.
For example:
if the argument "arr" is [2, 5, 6, -6, 16, 2, 3, 6, 5, 3] then the sum of all these elements is 42, and doubling it is 84. There are two elements in "arr", 16 * 6 = 96 where 96 is greater than 84, so your program should return the string true. An example of an "arr" that should return false is [1, 2, 4] since double its sum (14) is larger than multiplying its two largest elements (4 * 2 = 8).
my solution was
function ArrayChallenge(arr) {
if (arr.length < 2) return 'false'
let maxNeg = 0
let neg = 0
let pos = 0
let maxPos = 0
const sum = arr.reduce((total, num) => {
if (num < 0) {
if (num < neg) maxNeg = num
else neg = num
} else {
if (num >= maxPos) {
pos = maxPos
maxPos = num
} else if (num > pos) pos = num
}
return total + num
}, 0)
if (maxPos * pos > sum * 2 || maxNeg * neg > sum * 2) return 'true'
else return 'false'
}
https://codepen.io/hamodey85/pen/ExmrdgM

For this problem you need to understand the fact that if the highest possible product of the 2 numbers in the array are not greater than the twice sum of the array then there are no possible pairs available.
Steps to solve the problem
step 1
precompute the sum of the array.(can be easily done using for loop or reduce function)
step 2
get the 2 maximum values from the array(depending on allowed complexity you can either sort the array and get it i.e.O(nlogn) or traverse the array twice i.e.O(2n) which is better.
step 3
compare product of the 2 maximum and precomputed sum and return true if product is greater than the precomputed sum
Sorting Apprach
function ArrayChallenge(arr){
var precomputedSum = arr.reduce((a,c) => a+c,0); //Step 1
var sortedArray = arr.sort(function(a, b){return b-a});// Step 2
var product = sortedArray[0] * sortedArray[1];//part of step 2
return product > 2*precomputedSum ;
}
looping approach
function ArrayChallenge(arr){
var precomputedSum = arr.reduce((a,c) => a+c,0); //Step 1
int firstMax = -2147483648;// Step 2
for(int i=0;i<arr.length;i++){
if(arr[i]>firstMax)firstMax=arr[i];//step 2
}
int secondMax = -2147483648;// Step 2
for(int i=0;i<arr.length;i++){
if(arr[i]>secondMax && arr[i]!=firstMax)secondMax=arr[i];//step 2
}
var product = firstMax * secondMax;//part of step 2
return product > 2*precomputedSum ;
}

so I tried to solve it in several way but I found this better solution so far
function ArrayChallenge(arr) {
if (arr.length < 2) return 'false'
let maxNeg = 0
let neg = 0
let pos = 0
let maxPos = 0
const sum = arr.reduce((total, num) => {
if (num < 0) {
if (num < neg) maxNeg = num
else neg = num
} else {
if (num >= maxPos) {
pos = maxPos
maxPos = num
} else if (num > pos) pos = num
}
return total + num
}, 0)
if (maxPos * pos > sum * 2 || maxNeg * neg > sum * 2) return 'true'
else return 'false'
}

Find absolute sum of minimum slice - codility [duplicate]

This question already has answers here:
Finding minimal absolute sum of a subarray
(11 answers)
Closed 4 years ago.
Hi I've taken Codility test twice and scored 0. Please help me in solving the issue using JavaScript.
A non-empty array A consisting of N integers is given. A pair of integers (P, Q), such that 0 ≤ P ≤ Q < N, is called a slice of array A. The sum of a slice (P, Q) is the total of A[P] + A[P+1] + ... + A[Q].
A min abs slice is whose absolute sum is minimal.
For example, array A such that:
A[0] = 2
A[1] = -4
A[2] = 6
A[3] = -3
A[4] = 9
contains the following slice among others:
(0,1), whose absolute sum is = |2 + (-4)| = 2
(0,2), whose absolute sum is = |2 + (-4) + 6| = 4
(0,3), whose absolute sum is = |2 + (-4) + 6 + (-3)| = 1
(1,3), whose absolute sum is = |(-4) + 6 + (-3)| = 1
(1,4), whose absolute sum is = |(-4) + 6 + (-3) + 9| = 8
(4,4), whose absolute sum is = |9| = 9
Both slices (0,3) and (1,3) are min abs slice and their absolute sum equals 1.
Write a function:
function solution(A);
that, given a non-empty array A consisting of N integers, return the absolute sum of min abs slice.
Write an efficient algorithm for the following assumptions:
N is an integer within the range [1..1,000,000];
each element of array A is an integer within the range [−10,000..10,000];
Here is my solution:
function solution(A, i = 0, sum = 0) {
const N = A.length;
if (N === 0) {
return 0;
}
if (N == 1) {
return Math.abs(A[0]);
}
A.sort();
// All positives
if (A[0] >= 0 && A[N - 1] >= 0) {
return Math.abs(A[0]);
}
// All Negatives
if (A[0] <= 0 && A[N - 1] <= 0) {
return Math.abs(A[N - 1]);
}
let currAbsSum = 0;
let minAbsSum = Number.MAX_SAFE_INTEGER;
for (var i = 0; i < N; i++) {
let j = N - 1;
while (j >= i) {
currAbsSum = Math.abs(A[i] + A[j]);
if (currAbsSum === 0) {
return 0;
}
minAbsSum = Math.min(currAbsSum, minAbsSum);
if (Math.abs(A[i]) > Math.abs(A[j])) {
i++;
} else {
j--;
}
}
if (A[i] > 0) break;
}
return minAbsSum;
}

Here is a javascript version of O(n log n) answer taken from here:
function solution(A) {
if (1 == A.length) return Math.abs(A[0]);
let sums = new Array(A.length + 1);
let minAbsSum = Number.MAX_SAFE_INTEGER;
sums[0] = 0;
for (var i = 0; i < A.length; i++) {
sums[i + 1] = A[i] + sums[i];
}
sums.sort();
for (var i = 1; i < sums.length; i++) {
minAbsSum = Math.min(minAbsSum, Math.abs(sums[i] - sums[i - 1]));
}
return minAbsSum;
}
console.log(solution([2, -4, 6, -3, 9]))
console.log(solution([10, 10, 10, 10, 10, -50]))

How to find prime numbers between 0 - 100?

Want to improve this post? Provide detailed answers to this question, including citations and an explanation of why your answer is correct. Answers without enough detail may be edited or deleted.
In Javascript how would i find prime numbers between 0 - 100? i have thought about it, and i am not sure how to find them. i thought about doing x % x but i found the obvious problem with that.
this is what i have so far:
but unfortunately it is the worst code ever.
var prime = function (){
var num;
for (num = 0; num < 101; num++){
if (num % 2 === 0){
break;
}
else if (num % 3 === 0){
break;
}
else if (num % 4=== 0){
break;
}
else if (num % 5 === 0){
break;
}
else if (num % 6 === 0){
break;
}
else if (num % 7 === 0){
break;
}
else if (num % 8 === 0){
break;
}
else if (num % 9 === 0){
break;
}
else if (num % 10 === 0){
break;
}
else if (num % 11 === 0){
break;
}
else if (num % 12 === 0){
break;
}
else {
return num;
}
}
};
console.log(prime());

Here's an example of a sieve implementation in JavaScript:
function getPrimes(max) {
var sieve = [], i, j, primes = [];
for (i = 2; i <= max; ++i) {
if (!sieve[i]) {
// i has not been marked -- it is prime
primes.push(i);
for (j = i << 1; j <= max; j += i) {
sieve[j] = true;
}
}
}
return primes;
}
Then getPrimes(100) will return an array of all primes between 2 and 100 (inclusive). Of course, due to memory constraints, you can't use this with large arguments.
A Java implementation would look very similar.

Here's how I solved it. Rewrote it from Java to JavaScript, so excuse me if there's a syntax error.
function isPrime (n)
{
if (n < 2) return false;
/**
* An integer is prime if it is not divisible by any prime less than or equal to its square root
**/
var q = Math.floor(Math.sqrt(n));
for (var i = 2; i <= q; i++)
{
if (n % i == 0)
{
return false;
}
}
return true;
}
A number, n, is a prime if it isn't divisible by any other number other than by 1 and itself. Also, it's sufficient to check the numbers [2, sqrt(n)].

Here is the live demo of this script: http://jsfiddle.net/K2QJp/
First, make a function that will test if a single number is prime or not. If you want to extend the Number object you may, but I decided to just keep the code as simple as possible.
function isPrime(num) {
if(num < 2) return false;
for (var i = 2; i < num; i++) {
if(num%i==0)
return false;
}
return true;
}
This script goes through every number between 2 and 1 less than the number and tests if there is any number in which there is no remainder if you divide the number by the increment. If there is any without a remainder, it is not prime. If the number is less than 2, it is not prime. Otherwise, it is prime.
Then make a for loop to loop through the numbers 0 to 100 and test each number with that function. If it is prime, output the number to the log.
for(var i = 0; i < 100; i++){
if(isPrime(i)) console.log(i);
}

Whatever the language, one of the best and most accessible ways of finding primes within a range is using a sieve.
Not going to give you code, but this is a good starting point.
For a small range, such as yours, the most efficient would be pre-computing the numbers.

I have slightly modified the Sieve of Sundaram algorithm to cut the unnecessary iterations and it seems to be very fast.
This algorithm is actually two times faster than the most accepted #Ted Hopp's solution under this topic. Solving the 78498 primes between 0 - 1M takes like 20~25 msec in Chrome 55 and < 90 msec in FF 50.1. Also #vitaly-t's get next prime algorithm looks interesting but also results much slower.
This is the core algorithm. One could apply segmentation and threading to get superb results.
"use strict";
function primeSieve(n){
var a = Array(n = n/2),
t = (Math.sqrt(4+8*n)-2)/4,
u = 0,
r = [];
for(var i = 1; i <= t; i++){
u = (n-i)/(1+2*i);
for(var j = i; j <= u; j++) a[i + j + 2*i*j] = true;
}
for(var i = 0; i<= n; i++) !a[i] && r.push(i*2+1);
return r;
}
var primes = [];
console.time("primes");
primes = primeSieve(1000000);
console.timeEnd("primes");
console.log(primes.length);
The loop limits explained:
Just like the Sieve of Erasthotenes, the Sieve of Sundaram algorithm also crosses out some selected integers from the list. To select which integers to cross out the rule is i + j + 2ij ≤ n where i and j are two indices and n is the number of the total elements. Once we cross out every i + j + 2ij, the remaining numbers are doubled and oddified (2n+1) to reveal a list of prime numbers. The final stage is in fact the auto discounting of the even numbers. It's proof is beautifully explained here.
Sieve of Sundaram is only fast if the loop indices start and end limits are correctly selected such that there shall be no (or minimal) redundant (multiple) elimination of the non-primes. As we need i and j values to calculate the numbers to cross out, i + j + 2ij up to n let's see how we can approach.
i) So we have to find the the max value i and j can take when they are equal. Which is 2i + 2i^2 = n. We can easily solve the positive value for i by using the quadratic formula and that is the line with t = (Math.sqrt(4+8*n)-2)/4,
j) The inner loop index j should start from i and run up to the point it can go with the current i value. No more than that. Since we know that i + j + 2ij = n, this can easily be calculated as u = (n-i)/(1+2*i);
While this will not completely remove the redundant crossings it will "greatly" eliminate the redundancy. For instance for n = 50 (to check for primes up to 100) instead of doing 50 x 50 = 2500, we will do only 30 iterations in total. So clearly, this algorithm shouldn't be considered as an O(n^2) time complexity one.
i j v
1 1 4
1 2 7
1 3 10
1 4 13
1 5 16
1 6 19
1 7 22 <<
1 8 25
1 9 28
1 10 31 <<
1 11 34
1 12 37 <<
1 13 40 <<
1 14 43
1 15 46
1 16 49 <<
2 2 12
2 3 17
2 4 22 << dupe #1
2 5 27
2 6 32
2 7 37 << dupe #2
2 8 42
2 9 47
3 3 24
3 4 31 << dupe #3
3 5 38
3 6 45
4 4 40 << dupe #4
4 5 49 << dupe #5
among which there are only 5 duplicates. 22, 31, 37, 40, 49. The redundancy is around 20% for n = 100 however it increases to ~300% for n = 10M. Which means a further optimization of SoS bears the potentital to obtain the results even faster as n grows. So one idea might be segmentation and to keep n small all the time.
So OK.. I have decided to take this quest a little further.
After some careful examination of the repeated crossings I have come to the awareness of the fact that, by the exception of i === 1 case, if either one or both of the i or j index value is among 4,7,10,13,16,19... series, a duplicate crossing is generated. Then allowing the inner loop to turn only when i%3-1 !== 0, a further cut down like 35-40% from the total number of the loops is achieved. So for instance for 1M integers the nested loop's total turn count dropped to like 1M from 1.4M. Wow..! We are talking almost O(n) here.
I have just made a test. In JS, just an empty loop counting up to 1B takes like 4000ms. In the below modified algorithm, finding the primes up to 100M takes the same amount of time.
I have also implemented the segmentation part of this algorithm to push to the workers. So that we will be able to use multiple threads too. But that code will follow a little later.
So let me introduce you the modified Sieve of Sundaram probably at it's best when not segmented. It shall compute the primes between 0-1M in about 15-20ms with Chrome V8 and Edge ChakraCore.
"use strict";
function primeSieve(n){
var a = Array(n = n/2),
t = (Math.sqrt(4+8*n)-2)/4,
u = 0,
r = [];
for(var i = 1; i < (n-1)/3; i++) a[1+3*i] = true;
for(var i = 2; i <= t; i++){
u = (n-i)/(1+2*i);
if (i%3-1) for(var j = i; j < u; j++) a[i + j + 2*i*j] = true;
}
for(var i = 0; i< n; i++) !a[i] && r.push(i*2+1);
return r;
}
var primes = [];
console.time("primes");
primes = primeSieve(1000000);
console.timeEnd("primes");
console.log(primes.length);
Well... finally I guess i have implemented a sieve (which is originated from the ingenious Sieve of Sundaram) such that it's the fastest JavaScript sieve that i could have found over the internet, including the "Odds only Sieve of Eratosthenes" or the "Sieve of Atkins". Also this is ready for the web workers, multi-threading.
Think it this way. In this humble AMD PC for a single thread, it takes 3,300 ms for JS just to count up to 10^9 and the following optimized segmented SoS will get me the 50847534 primes up to 10^9 only in 14,000 ms. Which means 4.25 times the operation of just counting. I think it's impressive.
You can test it for yourself;
console.time("tare");
for (var i = 0; i < 1000000000; i++);
console.timeEnd("tare");
And here I introduce you to the segmented Seieve of Sundaram at it's best.
"use strict";
function findPrimes(n){
function primeSieve(g,o,r){
var t = (Math.sqrt(4+8*(g+o))-2)/4,
e = 0,
s = 0;
ar.fill(true);
if (o) {
for(var i = Math.ceil((o-1)/3); i < (g+o-1)/3; i++) ar[1+3*i-o] = false;
for(var i = 2; i < t; i++){
s = Math.ceil((o-i)/(1+2*i));
e = (g+o-i)/(1+2*i);
if (i%3-1) for(var j = s; j < e; j++) ar[i + j + 2*i*j-o] = false;
}
} else {
for(var i = 1; i < (g-1)/3; i++) ar[1+3*i] = false;
for(var i = 2; i < t; i++){
e = (g-i)/(1+2*i);
if (i%3-1) for(var j = i; j < e; j++) ar[i + j + 2*i*j] = false;
}
}
for(var i = 0; i < g; i++) ar[i] && r.push((i+o)*2+1);
return r;
}
var cs = n <= 1e6 ? 7500
: n <= 1e7 ? 60000
: 100000, // chunk size
cc = ~~(n/cs), // chunk count
xs = n % cs, // excess after last chunk
ar = Array(cs/2), // array used as map
result = [];
for(var i = 0; i < cc; i++) result = primeSieve(cs/2,i*cs/2,result);
result = xs ? primeSieve(xs/2,cc*cs/2,result) : result;
result[0] *=2;
return result;
}
var primes = [];
console.time("primes");
primes = findPrimes(1000000000);
console.timeEnd("primes");
console.log(primes.length);
Here I present a multithreaded and slightly improved version of the above algorithm. It utilizes all available threads on your device and resolves all 50,847,534 primes up to 1e9 (1 Billion) in the ballpark of 1.3 seconds on my trash AMD FX-8370 8 core desktop.
While there exists some very sophisticated sublinear sieves, I believe the modified Segmented Sieve of Sundaram could only be stretced this far to being linear in time complexity. Which is not bad.
class Threadable extends Function {
constructor(f){
super("...as",`return ${f.toString()}.apply(this,as)`);
}
spawn(...as){
var code = `self.onmessage = m => self.postMessage(${this.toString()}.apply(null,m.data));`,
blob = new Blob([code], {type: "text/javascript"}),
wrkr = new Worker(window.URL.createObjectURL(blob));
return new Promise((v,x) => ( wrkr.onmessage = m => (v(m.data), wrkr.terminate())
, wrkr.onerror = e => (x(e.message), wrkr.terminate())
, wrkr.postMessage(as)
));
}
}
function pi(n){
function scan(start,end,tid){
function sieve(g,o){
var t = (Math.sqrt(4+8*(g+o))-2)/4,
e = 0,
s = 0,
a = new Uint8Array(g),
c = 0,
l = o ? (g+o-1)/3
: (g-1)/3;
if (o) {
for(var i = Math.ceil((o-1)/3); i < l; i++) a[1+3*i-o] = 0x01;
for(var i = 2; i < t; i++){
if (i%3-1) {
s = Math.ceil((o-i)/(1+2*i));
e = (g+o-i)/(1+2*i);
for(var j = s; j < e; j++) a[i + j + 2*i*j-o] = 0x01;
}
}
} else {
for(var i = 1; i < l; i++) a[1+3*i] = 0x01;
for(var i = 2; i < t; i++){
if (i%3-1){
e = (g-i)/(1+2*i);
for(var j = i; j < e; j++) a[i + j + 2*i*j] = 0x01;
}
}
}
for (var i = 0; i < g; i++) !a[i] && c++;
return c;
}
end % 2 && end--;
start % 2 && start--;
var n = end - start,
cs = n < 2e6 ? 1e4 :
n < 2e7 ? 2e5 :
4.5e5 , // Math.floor(3*n/1e3), // chunk size
cc = Math.floor(n/cs), // chunk count
xs = n % cs, // excess after last chunk
pc = 0;
for(var i = 0; i < cc; i++) pc += sieve(cs/2,(start+i*cs)/2);
xs && (pc += sieve(xs/2,(start+cc*cs)/2));
return pc;
}
var tc = navigator.hardwareConcurrency,
xs = n % tc,
cs = (n-xs) / tc,
st = new Threadable(scan),
ps = Array.from( {length:tc}
, (_,i) => i ? st.spawn(i*cs+xs,(i+1)*cs+xs,i)
: st.spawn(0,cs+xs,i)
);
return Promise.all(ps);
}
var n = 1e9,
count;
console.time("primes");
pi(n).then(cs => ( count = cs.reduce((p,c) => p+c)
, console.timeEnd("primes")
, console.log(count)
)
)
.catch(e => console.log(`Error: ${e}`));
So this is as far as I could take the Sieve of Sundaram.

A number is a prime if it is not divisible by other primes lower than the number in question.
So this builds up a primes array. Tests each new odd candidate n for division against existing found primes lower than n. As an optimization it does not consider even numbers and prepends 2 as a final step.
var primes = [];
for(var n=3;n<=100;n+=2) {
if(primes.every(function(prime){return n%prime!=0})) {
primes.push(n);
}
}
primes.unshift(2);

To find prime numbers between 0 to n. You just have to check if a number x is getting divisible by any number between 0 - (square root of x). If we pass n and to find all prime numbers between 0 and n, logic can be implemented as -
function findPrimeNums(n)
{
var x= 3,j,i=2,
primeArr=[2],isPrime;
for (;x<=n;x+=2){
j = (int) Math.sqrt (x);
isPrime = true;
for (i = 2; i <= j; i++)
{
if (x % i == 0){
isPrime = false;
break;
}
}
if(isPrime){
primeArr.push(x);
}
}
return primeArr;
}

var n=100;
var counter = 0;
var primeNumbers = "Prime Numbers: ";
for(var i=2; i<=n; ++i)
{
counter=0;
for(var j=2; j<=n; ++j)
{
if(i>=j && i%j == 0)
{
++counter;
}
}
if(counter == 1)
{
primeNumbers = primeNumbers + i + " ";
}
}
console.log(primeNumbers);

Luchian's answer gives you a link to the standard technique for finding primes.
A less efficient, but simpler approach is to turn your existing code into a nested loop. Observe that you are dividing by 2,3,4,5,6 and so on ... and turn that into a loop.
Given that this is homework, and given that the aim of the homework is to help you learn basic programming, a solution that is simple, correct but somewhat inefficient should be fine.

Using recursion combined with the square root rule from here, checks whether a number is prime or not:
function isPrime(num){
// An integer is prime if it is not divisible by any prime less than or equal to its square root
var squareRoot = parseInt(Math.sqrt(num));
var primeCountUp = function(divisor){
if(divisor > squareRoot) {
// got to a point where the divisor is greater than
// the square root, therefore it is prime
return true;
}
else if(num % divisor === 0) {
// found a result that divides evenly, NOT prime
return false;
}
else {
// keep counting
return primeCountUp(++divisor);
}
};
// start # 2 because everything is divisible by 1
return primeCountUp(2);
}

You can try this method also, this one is basic but easy to understand:
var tw = 2, th = 3, fv = 5, se = 7;
document.write(tw + "," + th + ","+ fv + "," + se + ",");
for(var n = 0; n <= 100; n++)
{
if((n % tw !== 0) && (n % th !==0) && (n % fv !==0 ) && (n % se !==0))
{
if (n == 1)
{
continue;
}
document.write(n +",");
}
}

I recently came up with a one-line solution that accomplishes exactly this for a JS challenge on Scrimba (below).
ES6+
const getPrimes=num=>Array(num-1).fill().map((e,i)=>2+i).filter((e,i,a)=>a.slice(0,i).every(x=>e%x!==0));
< ES6
function getPrimes(num){return ",".repeat(num).slice(0,-1).split(',').map(function(e,i){return i+1}).filter(function(e){return e>1}).filter(function(x){return ",".repeat(x).slice(0,-1).split(',').map(function(f,j){return j}).filter(function(e){return e>1}).every(function(e){return x%e!==0})})};
This is the logic explained:
First, the function builds an array of all numbers leading up to the desired number (in this case, 100) via the .repeat() function using the desired number (100) as the repeater argument and then mapping the array to the indexes+1 to get the range of numbers from 0 to that number (0-100). A bit of string splitting and joining magic going on here. I'm happy to explain this step further if you like.
We exclude 0 and 1 from the array as they should not be tested for prime, lest they give a false positive. Neither are prime. We do this using .filter() for only numbers > 1 (≥ 2).
Now, we filter our new array of all integers between 2 and the desired number (100) for only prime numbers. To filter for prime numbers only, we use some of the same magic from our first step. We use .filter() and .repeat() once again to create a new array from 2 to each value from our new array of numbers. For each value's new array, we check to see if any of the numbers ≥ 2 and < that number are factors of the number. We can do this using the .every() method paired with the modulo operator % to check if that number has any remainders when divided by any of those values between 2 and itself. If each value has remainders (x%e!==0), the condition is met for all values from 2 to that number (but not including that number, i.e.: [2,99]) and we can say that number is prime. The filter functions returns all prime numbers to the uppermost return, thereby returning the list of prime values between 2 and the passed value.
As an example, using one of these functions I've added above, returns the following:
getPrimes(100);
// => [2,3,5,7,11,13,17,19,23,29,31,37,41,43,47,53,59,61,67,71,73,79,83,89,97]

Here's a fast way to calculate primes in JavaScript, based on the previous prime value.
function nextPrime(value) {
if (value > 2) {
var i, q;
do {
i = 3;
value += 2;
q = Math.floor(Math.sqrt(value));
while (i <= q && value % i) {
i += 2;
}
} while (i <= q);
return value;
}
return value === 2 ? 3 : 2;
}
Test
var value = 0, result = [];
for (var i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
value = nextPrime(value);
result.push(value);
}
console.log("Primes:", result);
Output
Primes: [ 2, 3, 5, 7, 11, 13, 17, 19, 23, 29 ]
It is faster than other alternatives published here, because:
It aligns the loop limit to an integer, which works way faster;
It uses a shorter iteration loop, skipping even numbers.
It can give you the first 100,000 primes in about 130ms, or the first 1m primes in about 4 seconds.
function nextPrime(value) {
if (value > 2) {
var i, q;
do {
i = 3;
value += 2;
q = Math.floor(Math.sqrt(value));
while (i <= q && value % i) {
i += 2;
}
} while (i <= q);
return value;
}
return value === 2 ? 3 : 2;
}
var value, result = [];
for (var i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
value = nextPrime(value);
result.push(value);
}
display("Primes: " + result.join(', '));
function display(msg) {
document.body.insertAdjacentHTML(
"beforeend",
"<p>" + msg + "</p>"
);
}
UPDATE
A modern, efficient way of doing it, using prime-lib:
import {generatePrimes, stopWhen} from 'prime-lib';
const p = generatePrimes(); //=> infinite prime generator
const i = stopWhen(p, a => a > 100); //=> Iterable<number>
console.log(...i); //=> 2 3 5 7 11 ... 89 97

<code>
<script language="javascript">
var n=prompt("Enter User Value")
var x=1;
if(n==0 || n==1) x=0;
for(i=2;i<n;i++)
{
if(n%i==0)
{
x=0;
break;
}
}
if(x==1)
{
alert(n +" "+" is prime");
}
else
{
alert(n +" "+" is not prime");
}
</script>

Sieve of Eratosthenes. its bit look but its simple and it works!
function count_prime(arg) {
arg = typeof arg !== 'undefined' ? arg : 20; //default value
var list = [2]
var list2 = [0,1]
var real_prime = []
counter = 2
while (counter < arg ) {
if (counter % 2 !== 0) {
list.push(counter)
}
counter++
}
for (i = 0; i < list.length - 1; i++) {
var a = list[i]
for (j = 0; j < list.length - 1; j++) {
if (list[j] % a === 0 && list[j] !== a) {
list[j] = false; // assign false to non-prime numbers
}
}
if (list[i] !== false) {
real_prime.push(list[i]); // save all prime numbers in new array
}
}
}
window.onload=count_prime(100);

And this famous code from a famous JS Ninja
var isPrime = n => Array(Math.ceil(Math.sqrt(n)+1)).fill().map((e,i)=>i).slice(2).every(m => n%m);
console.log(Array(100).fill().map((e,i)=>i+1).slice(1).filter(isPrime));

A list built using the new features of ES6, especially with generator.
Go to https://codepen.io/arius/pen/wqmzGp made in Catalan language for classes with my students. I hope you find it useful.
function* Primer(max) {
const infinite = !max && max !== 0;
const re = /^.?$|^(..+?)\1+$/;
let current = 1;
while (infinite || max-- ) {
if(!re.test('1'.repeat(current)) == true) yield current;
current++
};
};
let [...list] = Primer(100);
console.log(list);

Here's the very simple way to calculate primes between a given range(1 to limit).
Simple Solution:
public static void getAllPrimeNumbers(int limit) {
System.out.println("Printing prime number from 1 to " + limit);
for(int number=2; number<=limit; number++){
//***print all prime numbers upto limit***
if(isPrime(number)){
System.out.println(number);
}
}
}
public static boolean isPrime(int num) {
if (num == 0 || num == 1) {
return false;
}
if (num == 2) {
return true;
}
for (int i = 2; i <= num / 2; i++) {
if (num % i == 0) {
return false;
}
}
return true;
}

A version without any loop. Use this against any array you have. ie.,
[1,2,3...100].filter(x=>isPrime(x));
const isPrime = n => {
if(n===1){
return false;
}
if([2,3,5,7].includes(n)){
return true;
}
return n%2!=0 && n%3!=0 && n%5!=0 && n%7!=0;
}

Here's my stab at it.
Change the initial i=0 from 0 to whatever you want, and the the second i<100 from 100 to whatever to get primes in a different range.
for(var i=0; i<100000; i++){
var devisableCount = 2;
for(var x=0; x<=i/2; x++){
if (devisableCount > 3) {
break;
}
if(i !== 1 && i !== 0 && i !== x){
if(i%x === 0){
devisableCount++;
}
}
}
if(devisableCount === 3){
console.log(i);
}
}
I tried it with 10000000 - it takes some time but appears to be accurate.

Here are the Brute-force iterative method and Sieve of Eratosthenes method to find prime numbers upto n. The performance of the second method is better than first in terms of time complexity
Brute-force iterative
function findPrime(n) {
var res = [2],
isNotPrime;
for (var i = 3; i < n; i++) {
isNotPrime = res.some(checkDivisorExist);
if ( !isNotPrime ) {
res.push(i);
}
}
function checkDivisorExist (j) {
return i % j === 0;
}
return res;
}
Sieve of Eratosthenes method
function seiveOfErasthones (n) {
var listOfNum =range(n),
i = 2;
// CHeck only until the square of the prime is less than number
while (i*i < n && i < n) {
listOfNum = filterMultiples(listOfNum, i);
i++;
}
return listOfNum;
function range (num) {
var res = [];
for (var i = 2; i <= num; i++) {
res.push(i);
}
return res;
}
function filterMultiples (list, x) {
return list.filter(function (item) {
// Include numbers smaller than x as they are already prime
return (item <= x) || (item > x && item % x !== 0);
});
}
}

You can use this for any size of array of prime numbers. Hope this helps
function prime() {
var num = 2;
var body = document.getElementById("solution");
var len = arguments.length;
var flag = true;
for (j = 0; j < len; j++) {
for (i = num; i < arguments[j]; i++) {
if (arguments[j] % i == 0) {
body.innerHTML += arguments[j] + " False <br />";
flag = false;
break;
} else {
flag = true;
}
}
if (flag) {
body.innerHTML += arguments[j] + " True <br />";
}
}
}
var data = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10];
prime.apply(null, data);
<div id="solution">
</div>

public static void main(String[] args) {
int m = 100;
int a[] =new int[m];
for (int i=2; i<m; i++)
for (int j=0; j<m; j+=i)
a[j]++;
for (int i=0; i<m; i++)
if (a[i]==1) System.out.println(i);
}

Using Sieve of Eratosthenes, source on Rosettacode
fastest solution: https://repl.it/#caub/getPrimes-bench
function getPrimes(limit) {
if (limit < 2) return [];
var sqrtlmt = limit**.5 - 2;
var nums = Array.from({length: limit-1}, (_,i)=>i+2);
for (var i = 0; i <= sqrtlmt; i++) {
var p = nums[i]
if (p) {
for (var j = p * p - 2; j < nums.length; j += p)
nums[j] = 0;
}
}
return nums.filter(x => x); // return non 0 values
}
document.body.innerHTML = `<pre style="white-space:pre-wrap">${getPrimes(100).join(', ')}</pre>`;
// for fun, this fantasist regexp way (very inefficient):
// Array.from({length:101}, (_,i)=>i).filter(n => n>1&&!/^(oo+)\1+$/.test('o'.repeat(n))

Why try deleting by 4 (and 6,8,10,12) if we've already tried deleting by 2 ?
Why try deleting by 9 if we've already tried deleting by 3 ?
Why try deleting by 11 if 11 * 11 = 121 which is greater than 100 ?
Why try deleting any odd number by 2 at all?
Why try deleting any even number above 2 by anything at all?
Eliminate the dead tests and you'll get yourself a good code, testing for primes below 100.
And your code is very far from being the worst code ever. Many many others would try dividing 100 by 99. But the absolute champion would generate all products of 2..96 with 2..96 to test whether 97 is among them. That one really is astonishingly inefficient.
Sieve of Eratosthenes of course is much better, and you can have one -- under 100 -- with no arrays of booleans (and no divisions too!):
console.log(2)
var m3 = 9, m5 = 25, m7 = 49, i = 3
for( ; i < 100; i += 2 )
{
if( i != m3 && i != m5 && i != m7) console.log(i)
else
{
if( i == m3 ) m3 += 6
if( i == m5 ) m5 += 10
if( i == m7 ) m7 += 14
}
} "DONE"
This is the sieve of Eratosthenes, were we skip over the composites - and that's what this code is doing. The timing of generation of composites and of skipping over them (by checking for equality) is mixed into one timeline. The usual sieve first generates composites and marks them in an array, then sweeps the array. Here the two stages are mashed into one, to avoid having to use any array at all (this only works because we know the top limit's square root - 10 - in advance and use only primes below it, viz. 3,5,7 - with 2's multiples, i.e. evens, implicitly skipped over in advance).
In other words this is an incremental sieve of Eratosthenes and m3, m5, m7 form an implicit priority queue of the multiples of primes 3, 5, and 7.

I was searching how to find out prime number and went through above code which are too long. I found out a new easy solution for prime number and add them using filter. Kindly suggest me if there is any mistake in my code as I am a beginner.
function sumPrimes(num) {
let newNum = [];
for(let i = 2; i <= num; i++) {
newNum.push(i)
}
for(let i in newNum) {
newNum = newNum.filter(item => item == newNum[i] || item % newNum[i] !== 0)
}
return newNum.reduce((a,b) => a+b)
}
sumPrimes(10);

Here is an efficient, short solution using JS generators. JSfiddle
// Consecutive integers
let nats = function* (n) {
while (true) yield n++
}
// Wrapper generator
let primes = function* () {
yield* sieve(primes(), nats(2))
}
// The sieve itself; only tests primes up to sqrt(n)
let sieve = function* (pg, ng) {
yield ng.next().value;
let n, p = pg.next().value;
while ((n = ng.next().value) < p * p) yield n;
yield* sieve(pg, (function* () {
while (n = ng.next().value) if (n % p) yield n
})())
}
// Longest prefix of stream where some predicate holds
let take = function* (vs, fn) {
let nx;
while (!(nx = vs.next()).done && fn(nx.value)) yield nx.value
}
document.querySelectorAll('dd')[0].textContent =
// Primes smaller than 100
[...take(primes(), x => x < 100)].join(', ')
<dl>
<dt>Primes under 100</dt>
<dd></dd>
</dl>

First, change your inner code for another loop (for and while) so you can repeat the same code for different values.
More specific for your problem, if you want to know if a given n is prime, you need to divide it for all values between 2 and sqrt(n). If any of the modules is 0, it is not prime.
If you want to find all primes, you can speed it and check n only by dividing by the previously found primes. Another way of speeding the process is the fact that, apart from 2 and 3, all the primes are 6*k plus or less 1.

It would behoove you, if you're going to use any of the gazillion algorithms that you're going to be presented with in this thread, to learn to memoize some of them.
See Interview question : What is the fastest way to generate prime number recursively?

Use following function to find out prime numbers :
function primeNumbers() {
var p
var n = document.primeForm.primeText.value
var d
var x
var prime
var displayAll = 2 + " "
for (p = 3; p <= n; p = p + 2) {
x = Math.sqrt(p)
prime = 1
for (d = 3; prime && (d <= x); d = d + 2)
if ((p % d) == 0) prime = 0
else prime = 1
if (prime == 1) {
displayAll = displayAll + p + " "
}
}
document.primeForm.primeArea.value = displayAll
}

How to divide number into integer pieces that are each a multiple of n?

Had a hard time coming up with a concise title for this. I'm sure there are terms for what I want to accomplish and there is no doubt a common algorithm to accomplish what I'm after - I just don't know about them yet.
I need to break up a number into n pieces that are each a multiple of 50. The number is itself a multiple of 50. Here is an example:
Divide 5,000 by 3 and end up with three numbers that are each multiples of 50:
1,650
1,700
1,650
I also would like to have the numbers distributed so that they flip back and forth, here is an example with more numbers to illustrate this:
Divide 5,000 by 7 and end up with 7 numbers that are each multiples of 50:
700
750
700
750
700
700
700
Note that in the above example I'm not worried that the extra 50 is not centered in the series, that is I don't need to have something like this:
700
700
750 <--- note the '50s' are centered
700
750 <--- note the '50s' are centered
700
700
Hopefully I've asked this clearly enough that you understand what I want to accomplish.
Update: Here is the function I'll be using.
var number = 5000;
var n = 7;
var multiple = 50;
var values = getIntDividedIntoMultiple(number, n, multiple)
function getIntDividedIntoMultiple(dividend, divisor, multiple)
{
var values = [];
while (dividend> 0 && divisor > 0)
{
var a = Math.round(dividend/ divisor / multiple) * multiple;
dividend -= a;
divisor--;
values.push(a);
}
return values;
}

var number = 5000;
var n = 7;
var values = [];
while (number > 0 && n > 0) {
var a = Math.floor(number / n / 50) * 50;
number -= a;
n--;
values.push(a);
} // 700 700 700 700 700 750 750
Edit
You can alternate Math.floor and Math.ceil to obtain the desired result:
while (number > 0 && n > 0) {
if (a%2 == 0)
a = Math.floor(number / n / 50) * 50;
else
a = Math.ceil(number / n / 50) * 50;
number -= a;
n--;
values.push(a);
} // 700 750 700 750 700 700 700

// i - an integer multiple of k
// k - an integer
// n - a valid array length
// returns an array of length n containing integer multiples of k
// such that the elements sum to i and the array is sorted,
// contains the minimum number of unique elements necessary to
// satisfy the first condition, the elements chosen are the
// closest together that satisfy the first condition.
function f(i, k, n) {
var minNumber = (((i / k) / n) | 0) * k;
var maxNumber = minNumber + k;
var numMax = (i - (minNumber * n)) / k;
var nums = [];
for (var i = 0; i < n - numMax; ++i) {
nums[i] = minNumber;
}
for (var i = n - numMax; i < n; ++i) {
nums[i] = maxNumber;
}
return nums;
}
So your second example would be
f(5000, 50, 7)
which yields
[700,700,700,700,700,750,750]

Let a be your starting number, k - number of parts you want to divide to.
Suppose, that b = a/n.
Now you want to divide b into k close integer parts.
Take k numbers, each equal to b/k (integer division).
Add 1 to first b%k numbers.
Multiply each number by n.
Example:
a = 5000, n = 50, k = 7.
b = 100
Starting series {14, 14, 14, 14, 14, 14, 14}
Add 1 to first 2 integers {15, 15, 14, 14, 14, 14, 14}.
Multiply by 50 {750, 750, 700, 700, 700, 700, 700}.

Your problem is the same as dividing a number X into N integer pieces that are all within 1 of each other (just multiply everything by 50 after you've found the result). Doing this is easy - set all N numbers to Floor(X/N), then add 1 to X mod N of them.

I see your problem as basically trying to divide a sum of money into near-equal bundles of bills of a certain denomination.
For example, dividing 10,000 dollars into 7 near-equal bundles of 50-dollar bills.
function getBundles(sum, denomination, count, shuffle)
{
var p = Math.floor(sum / denomination);
var q = Math.floor(p / count);
var r = p - q * count;
console.log(r + " of " + ((q + 1) * denomination)
+ " and " + (count - r) + " of " + (q * denomination));
var b = new Array(count);
for (var i = 0; i < count; i++) {
b[i] = (r > 0 && (!shuffle || Math.random() < .5 || count - i == r)
? (--r, q + 1) : q)
* denomination;
}
return b;
}
// Divide 10,000 dollars into 7 near-equal bundles of 50-dollar bills
var bundles = getBundles(10000, 50, 7, true);
console.log("bundles: " + bundles);
Output:
4 of 1450 and 3 of 1400
bundles: 1400,1450,1450,1400,1450,1400,1450
If the last argument shuffle is true, it distributes the extra amount randomly between the bundles.

Here's my take:
public static void main(String[] args) {
System.out.println(toList(divide(50, 5000, 3)));
System.out.println(toList(divide(50, 5000, 7)));
System.out.println(toList(divide(33, 6600, 7)));
}
private static ArrayList<Integer> toList(int[] args) {
ArrayList<Integer> list = new ArrayList<Integer>(args.length);
for (int i : args)
list.add(i);
return list;
}
public static int[] divide(int N, int multiplyOfN, int partsCount) {
if (N <= 0 || multiplyOfN <= N || multiplyOfN % N != 0)
throw new IllegalArgumentException("Invalid args");
int factor = multiplyOfN / N;
if (partsCount > factor)
throw new IllegalArgumentException("Invalid args");
int parts[] = new int[partsCount];
int remainingAdjustments = factor % partsCount;
int base = ((multiplyOfN / partsCount) / N) * N;
for (int i = 0; i < partsCount; i ++) {
parts[i] = (i % 2 == 1 && remainingAdjustments-- > 0) ? base + N : base;
}
return parts;
}

My algorithm provides even distribution of remainder across parts:
function splitValue(value, parts, multiplicity)
{
var result = [];
var currentSum = 0;
for (var i = 0; i < parts; i++)
{
result[i] = Math.round(value * (i + 1) / parts / multiplicity) * multiplicity - currentSum;
currentSum += result[i];
}
return result;
}
For value = 5000, parts = 7, multiplicity = 50 it returns
[ 700, 750, 700, 700, 700, 750, 700 ]