I ran into this potential scenario that I posed to a few of my employees as a test question. I can think of a couple ways to solve this problem, but neither of them are very pretty. I was wondering what solutions might be best for this as well as any optimization tips. Here's the question:
Given some arbitrary string "mystr" in dot notation (e.g. mystr = "node1.node2.node3.node4") at any length, write a function called "expand" that will create each of these items as a new node layer in a js object. For the example above, it should output the following, given that my object name is "blah":
blah: { node1: { node2: { node3: { node4: {}}}}}
From the function call:
mystr = "node1.node2.node3.node4";
blah = {};
expand(blah,mystr);
Alternately, if easier, the function could be created to set a variable as a returned value:
mystr = "node1.node2.node3.node4";
blah = expand(mystr);
Extra credit: have an optional function parameter that will set the value of the last node. So, if I called my function "expand" and called it like so: expand(blah, mystr, "value"), the output should give the same as before but with node4 = "value" instead of {}.
In ES6 you can do it like this:
const expand = (str, defaultVal = {}) => {
return str.split('.').reduceRight((acc, currentVal) => {
return {
[currentVal]: acc
}
}, defaultVal)
}
const blah = expand('a.b.c.d', 'last value')
console.log(blah)
Here's a method that popped up in my mind. It splits the string on the dot notation, and then loops through the nodes to create objects inside of objects, using a 'shifting reference' (not sure if that's the right term though).
The object output within the function contains the full object being built throughout the function, but ref keeps a reference that shifts to deeper and deeper within output, as new sub-objects are created in the for-loop.
Finally, the last value is applied to the last given name.
function expand(str, value)
{
var items = mystr.split(".") // split on dot notation
var output = {} // prepare an empty object, to fill later
var ref = output // keep a reference of the new object
// loop through all nodes, except the last one
for(var i = 0; i < items.length - 1; i ++)
{
ref[items[i]] = {} // create a new element inside the reference
ref = ref[items[i]] // shift the reference to the newly created object
}
ref[items[items.length - 1]] = value // apply the final value
return output // return the full object
}
The object is then returned, so this notation can be used:
mystr = "node1.node2.node3.node4";
blah = expand(mystr, "lastvalue");
var obj = {a:{b:{c:"a"}}};
const path = "a.b.c".split(".");
while(path.length > 1){
obj = obj[path.shift()];
}
obj[path.shift()] = "a";
Related
The function takes an input path like a.b.c and should output a nested structure json like:
{
a: {
b: {
c: {}
}
}
}
The algorithm using iterative style is:
function stringToObj(path, obj) {
var parts = path.split(".");
var part;
while ((part = parts.shift())) {
if (typeof obj[part] != "object") obj[part] = {};
obj = obj[part]; // line 6
}
}
Current usage:
let result = {};
stringToObj("a.b.c", result);
console.log(result); // outputs the json
JsFiddle
The problem:
It relies mutating the obj parameter on line 6.
I would like to not rely upon passing the result object, and rather create one inside the function. Doing so results in different results. A desired example usage:
const result = stringToObj("a.b.c"); // result should be the json
Context:
The exercise is for learning purpose. Main objective is understanding why removing obj and rewriting the function as per follows doesn't work as expected:
function stringToObj(path) {
var obj = {};
var parts = path.split(".");
var part;
while ((part = parts.shift())) {
if (typeof obj[part] != "object") obj[part] = {};
obj = obj[part]; // line 6
}
return obj;
}
After splitting by .s, you can use reduceRight to start at the last property, c, while taking an initial value of an empty object. Inside the callback, use a computed property to return a new object containing the old object at the property being iterated over:
const stringToObj = str => str.split('.').reduceRight(
(lastObj, prop) => ({ [prop]: lastObj }), {}
);
console.log(stringToObj('a.b.c'));
If you're not familiar with it, reduceRight is like reduce, except that it iterates starting from the last element in the array and going backwards, instead of starting from the first element of the array and going forwards. On each iteration, the callback is called, where the first argument (here, lastObj) is the value returned from the last iteration, and the second argument is the current item of the array being iterated over.
You can also reverse the array of properties and use reduce instead of reduceRight, which might be easier to understand at a glance, but it's a bit less elegant:
const stringToObj = str => str.split('.').reverse().reduce(
(lastObj, prop) => ({ [prop]: lastObj }), {}
);
console.log(stringToObj('a.b.c'));
Also, don't mix var and let. If you're going to use ES2015 syntax - which you should - consider always using const, and only use let when you must reassign. Never use var, it has too many gotchas to be worth using in modern code.
I don't understand the purpose of this = sign on the sixth line in the code block below. I understand how the argument grabs each index number of the array, I just don't understand why chineseFood[array[0]] = array[array.length-1]; In other words, I don't get the purpose of the equal sign as if it were almost comparing each other to be stored in the empty object that is stored in the variable chineseFood. Could someone please clarify? It would be much appreciated.
function transformFirstAndLast(array) {
var chineseFood = {};
//takes 1st element (at index 0) and sets it to the last element (nth index): array(length-1)
chineseFood[array[0]] = array[array.length - 1];
return chineseFood;
}
console.log( transformFirstAndLast(['Orange', 'Lemon', 'Pork', 'Chicken']) );
Output Below
{Orange: "Chicken"}
The equals sign is not comparison, it is assignment. chineseFood is an object, which means that it can be treated like a dictionary, and its properties can be accessed using the [] operator instead of the . operator:
myObj = {
foo: "bar"
};
console.log(myObj["foo"]); // bar
console.log(myObj.foo); // bar
Likewise, you can also assign properties this way:
myObj = {};
myObj["foo"] = 3;
console.log(myObj["foo"]); // 3
console.log(myObj.foo); // 3
This is what your code is doing. It is retrieving the value of array[array.length-1], which is "Chicken". Then it is assigning this value to the property of chineseFood that has the name represented by array[0], which happens to be "Orange". Thus, the property named Orange on chineseFood is set to array[array.length - 1], which is why chineseFood evaluates to {Orange: "Chicken"}.
This method of accessing properties is especially useful when you don't know the name of the property you will be changing in advance, as is the case with this code, or when you want to create properties that have names that would otherwise be illegal:
myObj = {
".you can't usually use with spaces or start w/ periods": false
};
myObj[".you can't usually use with spaces or start w/ periods"] = true;
console.log(myObj[".you can't usually use with spaces or start w/ periods"]);
// there is no way to read this property the normal way
Basically what is does is:
your object is :
var obj = {Orange: "Chicken"};
And Your array is :
var arr = ['Orange','Lemon','Pork','Chicken']
What this line says is pick first element of the array and check for this prop in object and change its value to last element of array, here:
arr[0] = "orange";
So this line :
obj[arr[0]] can be seen as obj['orange'].
After that you change its value:
Obj[arr[0]] = arr[arr.length-1] which can be written as obj['orange'] = 'chicken'
While I realize that an array, as a non-primitive data type, is handled by references in JavaScript, not by value, any particular element of that array could be a primitive data type, and I assume then that it is not assigned by reference.
I'd like to know how to get a reference to an individual element in an array so that I don't have to keep referring to the array and the index number while changing that element?
i.e.
var myElement=someArray[4]
myElement=5
//now someArray[4]=5
Am I misinterpreting various docs that imply but do not explicitly state that this is not the intended behavior?
You can make a copy of an array element, but you can't create a value that serves as an alias for an array property reference. That's also true for object properties; of course, array element references are object property references.
The closest you could get would be to create an object with a setter that used code to update your array. That would look something like:
var someArray = [ ... whatever ... ];
var obj = {
set element5(value) {
someArray[5] = value;
}
};
Then:
obj.element5 = 20;
would update someArray[5]. That is clearly not really an improvement over someArray[5] = 20.
edit — Now, note that if your array element is an object, then making a copy of the element means making a copy of the reference to the object. Thus:
var someArray = [ { foo: "hello world" } ];
var ref = someArray[0];
Then:
ref.foo = "Goodbye, cruel world!";
will update the "foo" property of the object referenced by someArray[0].
You can always pass around a closure to update this:
var myUpdater = function(x) {
someArray[4] = x;
}
myUpdater(5);
If you want read/write capabilities, box it:
var makeBox = function(arr, n) {
return {
read: function() { return arr[n]; },
write: function(x) { arr[n] = x; }
};
}
// and then:
var ptr = makeBox(someArray, 4);
ptr.read(); // original
ptr.write(newValue);
someArray[4]; // newValue
Let's I have next object
var o = { "foo" : {"bar" : "omg"} };
I can get value of key foo using
o["foo"] // return {"bar" : "omg"}
and I can get value of key bar inside foo using
o["foo"]["bar"] // return "omg"
Can I get value of key bar inside foo using brackets [] single time.
Somethong like
o["foo.bar"] // not working(
or
o["foo/bar"] // not working(
It is fairly common to create a getter function to do something like this. From the comment:
I have object o and string 'foo.bar', and i want get "omg".
var getProp = function (theObject, propString) {
var current = theObject;
var split = propString.split('.');
for (var i = 0; i < split.length; i++) {
if (current.hasOwnProperty(split[i])) {
current = current[split[i]];
}
}
return current;
};
http://jsfiddle.net/MXu2M/
Note: this is a thrown together example, you'd want to bullet proof and buff it up before dropping it on your site.
No, you must use o["foo"]["bar"] because it's an object inside another object. If you want to access it with "foo.bar", it means you must create the first object like this:
var o = {"foo.bar": "omg"}
o["foo.bar"] or o["foo/bar"] are not valid for your example. You could use this notation that is cleaner:
var bar = o.foo.bar // bar will contain 'omg'
there is a way, but I'm not sure this is what you asked for:
eval("o.foo.bar");
it is dangerous though, and doesn't use [] , but if what you want is to use a string for accessing any object it works
Unfortunately, you can only use o["foo"]["bar"] or o.foo.bar
this.String = {
Get : function (val) {
return function() {
return val;
}
}
};
What is the ':' doing?
this.String = {} specifies an object. Get is a property of that object. In javascript, object properties and their values are separated by a colon ':'.
So, per the example, you would call the function like this
this.String.Get('some string');
More examples:
var foo = {
bar : 'foobar',
other : {
a : 'wowza'
}
}
alert(foo.bar); //alerts 'foobar'
alert(foo.other.a) //alerts 'wowza'
Others have already explained what this code does. It creates an object (called this.String) that contains a single function (called Get). I'd like to explain when you could use this function.
This function can be useful in cases where you need a higher order function (that is a function that expects another function as its argument).
Say you have a function that does something to each element of an Array, lets call it map. You could use this function like so:
function inc (x)
{
return x + 1;
}
var arr = [1, 2, 3];
var newArr = arr.map(inc);
What the map function will do, is create a new array containing the values [2, 3, 4]. It will do this by calling the function inc with each element of the array.
Now, if you use this method a lot, you might continuously be calling map with all sorts of arguments:
arr.map(inc); // to increase each element
arr.map(even); // to create a list of booleans (even or odd)
arr.map(toString); // to create a list of strings
If for some reason you'd want to replace the entire array with the same string (but keeping the array of the same size), you could call it like so:
arr.map(this.String.Get("my String"));
This will create a new array of the same size as arr, but just containing the string "my String" over and over again.
Note that in some languages, this function is predefined and called const or constant (since it will always return the same value, each time you call it, no matter what its arguments are).
Now, if you think that this example isn't very useful, I would agree with you. But there are cases, when programming with higher order functions, when this technique is used.
For example, it can be useful if you have a tree you want to 'clear' of its values but keep the structure of the tree. You could do tree.map(this.String.Get("default value")) and get a whole new tree is created that has the exact same shape as the original, but none of its values.
It assigns an object that has a property "Get" to this.String. "Get" is assigned an anonymous function, which will return a function that just returns the argument that was given to the first returning function. Sounds strange, but here is how it can be used:
var ten = this.String["Get"](10)();
ten will then contain a 10. Instead, you could have written the equivalent
var ten = this.String.Get(10)();
// saving the returned function can have more use:
var generatingFunction = this.String.Get("something");
alert(generatingFunction()); // displays "something"
That is, : just assigns some value to a property.
This answer may be a bit superflous since Tom's is a good answer but just to boil it down and be complete:-
this.String = {};
Adds an object to the current object with the property name of String.
var fn = function(val) {
return function() { return(val); }
}
Returns a function from a closure which in turn returns the parameter used in creating the closure. Hence:-
var fnInner = fn("Hello World!");
alert(fnInner()); // Displays Hello World!
In combination then:-
this.String = { Get: function(val) {
return function() { return(val); }
}
Adds an object to the current object with the property name of String that has a method called Get that returns a function from a closure which in turn returns the parameter used in creating the closure.
var fnInner = this.String.Get("Yasso!");
alert(fnInner()); //displays Yasso!