I'm developing web XMPP chat. After retrieving of Roster I'm putting people infos to array of objects, but before pushing object to array I must check for it previous existence on that array, and it's quite slow, because it makes operations in count of sum of arithmetic series, which is ex. 820 for 40 number of contacts, and that number doesn't make me happy. And my question is: are there any optimizations possible for search method in this case?
Also I don't wan't to convert array to associative array.
Objects are not sorted.
I know there are other threads, but there is nothing about optimization.
Use both an array an an object.
var info_array = [];
var info_object = {};
Then when you get a new info, do:
if (!info_object[info.name]) {
info_array.push(info);
info_object[info.name] = info;
}
Now you can either iterate over info_array, or access them by name quickly using info_object.
Related
So I made a function to push user-inputted strings to a stack by using the built in .push(e) function like so:
push() {
const arrays = this.array.push(String(this.userInput))
console.log(this.array)
}
and with every click of the push button the console updates the array pushing whatever the user has inputted into an HTML text field which I have also made. I showed it to a friend and they told me that this method was sort of cheating as I'm making a Stack of stacks and that there is a way to...
Implement a Stack using only an index, a count, and an array.
Conceptually I know what these are, the index is an objects position in a given array, and an array is a collection of objects of the same variable types and a count is ostensibly a count (correct me if I'm wrong?). However tying these concepts together to implement a stack is a little beyond me as a first semester computer science student is there a lay-mans terms way of explaining how these things can be tied together to implement a stack?
To do what you're doing without using the built-in push method, just assign to the index at the current length of the array. No need to keep track of any other variables:
push() {
this.array[this.array.length] = String(this.userInput);
// if you also need your implementation to return the new length, then:
return this.array.length;
}
Or, for pop:
pop() {
const item = this.array[this.array.length - 1];
this.array.length = Math.max(this.array.length - 1, 0);
return item;
}
Keep in mind that push returns the new length of the array, so const arrays = this.array.push(String(this.userInput)) won't give you an array in return.
My first function scrapes my employers site for a list of users who have completed a task and outputs a json file containing the results. The json file is organized as follows:
{"Completed":[{"task":"TitleOfTaskAnd01/01/2019", "name":"UsersFullName"},{"task":"TitleOfTaskAnd01/01/2019", "name":"UsersFullName"}...]}
My second function uses the aforementioned json file to automatically generate receipts. On calling these two functions again I would like to leave out all of the previously utilized data, and only generate receipts for the tasks that were not in the results of any previous calls, therefore avoiding the generation of duplicates.
I tried to filter the first array by the elements of the second array, however as far as I can tell you cannot compare objects, or even arrays for that matter. Here is the function I tried to adjust to my needs:
let myArray = myArray.filter( ( el ) => !toRemove.includes( el ) );
I expect that my use case is not too uncommon and there is already a body of experience regarding best practices in this situation. I prefer solutions that use just javascript, so that I can understand how to navigate the situation better in the future. If however you have a library/module solution that is welcomed as well. Thanks in advance.
The problem is that two objects are never equal (except they are references to the same object). To check for structural equality, you have to manually compare their properties:
myArray.filter(el => !toRemove.some(el2 => el.task === el2.task && el.name === el2.name));
While that works, it will be quite slow for a lot of elements as you compare each object of myArray against all objects of toRemove. To improve that, you could generate a unique hash out of the properties and add that hash into a Set:
const hash = obj => JSON.stringify([obj.name, obj.task]);
const remove = new Set(toRemove.map(hash));
const result = myArray.filter(el => !remove.has(hash(el)));
This will be O(n + m), whereas the previous solutions was O(n * m).
Recently i had to make an Array with values at large indexes (due to plugin constraints).
eg:
var names[100000] = "a";
var names[150000] = "b" ... and so on till 5 large indexes.
and in between all values are undefined names[100001] //undefined.
Now my doubt is Since the array has only 5 elements but if i do
names.length //it is 300001
its a large Array. I am not iterating this array nor i am running any loop through it. I will get the values directly through their defined indexes from the array.
So will this structure make any significant performance differences on the Browser or is it alright to use this as long as the number of values in the array is less irrespective of its indexes and no iteration is involved.
Thanks
The only thing that differentiates an array from a plain object is its length property and how it behaves (and a few array specific methods of course). The length value simply increases with certain operations, like setting a numeric property or pushing a new element. That's it in a nutshell. The array doesn't actually contain 100000 elements when you set the property 100000 to a value, all that's happening is that you're setting one property and the value of length is adjusted accordingly.
So, no, it won't have a lot of impact on performance, unless somebody actually iterates through the array using for (let i = 0; i < arr.length; i++).
You can create an array with the length, given by your plugin and work locally with an object to limit the iterations. After all your processing has been applied, you copy the values to the array and send it to the plugin's function.
Keep an array with the desired length as a buffer
var buffer = new Array(20000);
Internally work with an object
var data = {};
Assign values to the object
data[10001] = "foo";
Once transformations or data processing has been applied to the object, copy data to the buffer
for (key in data){
buffer[key] = data[key];
}
Send buffer to the plugin. And clear data, if desired.
By doing so, you will not iterate more, than the actual data you processed.
I'm making a web app where a user gets data from PHP, and the data consists of MySQL rows, so I want to save the used ones in a global variable, something like a buffer, to prevent extra AJAX requests.
I'm doing this right now :
window.ray = []; // global variable
$(function(){
data = getDataWithAjax(idToSearch);
window.ray[data.id] = data.text;
});
but when the id is big, say 10 for now, window.ray becomes this :
,,,,,,,,42
so it contains 9 unnecessary spots. Or does it? Is it only visible when I'm doing console.log(window.ray);
If this is inefficient, I want to find a way like PHP, where I can assign only indices that I want, like :
$array['420'] = "abc";
$array['999'] = "xyz";
Is my current way as efficient as PHP, or does it actually contain unnecessary memory spots?
Thanks for any help !
Use an object instead of an array. The object will let you use the id as the key and be more efficient for non-sequential id values.
window.ray = {}; // global variable
$(function(){
data = getDataWithAjax(idToSearch);
window.ray[data.id] = data.text;
});
You can then access any element by the id:
var text = window.ray[myId];
If you are assigning values directly by property name, then it doesn't make any difference in terms of performance whether you use an Array or an Object. The property names of Arrays are strings, just like Objects.
In the following:
var a = [];
a[1000] = 'foo';
then a is (a reference to) an array with length 1,001 (always at least one greater than the highest index) but it only has one numeric member, the one called '1000', there aren't 1,000 other empty members, e.g.:
a.hasOwnProperty['999']; // false
Arrays are just Objects with a special, self–adjusting length property and some mostly generic methods that can be applied to any suitable object.
One feature of sparse arrays (i.e. where the numeric properties from 0 to length aren't contiguous) is that a for loop will loop over every value, including the missing ones. That can be avoided and significant performance gains realised by using a for..in loop and using a hasOwnProperty test, just like an Object.
But if you aren't going to use any of the special features of an Array, you might as well just use an Object as suggested by jfriend00.
I have an ajax call that returns a JSON object that is pretty complex and I'm having a hard time sorting it.
My call:
$.post('/reports-ajax',arguments, function(data) {}
The response:
{
"10001":{
"unitname":"Fort Worth",
"discounts":{"12-02-2012":"34.810000","12-03-2012":"20.810000","12-04-2012":"27.040000"},
"gross":{"12-02-2012":"56.730000","12-03-2012":"19.350000","12-04-2012":"66.390000"},
"net":{"12-02-2012":"61.920000","12-03-2012":"98.540000","12-04-2012":"39.350000"},
"discounts_total":82.66,
"gross_total":82.47,
"net_total":99.81,
"number":10001
},
"10002":{
"unitname":"Dallast",
"discounts":{"12-02-2012":"12.600000","12-03-2012":"25.780000","12-04-2012":"47.780000","12-05-2012":"45.210000"},
"gross":{"12-02-2012":"29.370000","12-03-2012":"91.110000","12-04-2012":"60.890000","12-05-2012":"51.870000"},
"net":{"12-02-2012":"16.770000","12-03-2012":"65.330000","12-04-2012":"13.110000","12-05-2012":"06.660000"},
"discounts_total":131.37,
"gross_total":33.24,
"net_total":101.87,
"number":10002
},
"32402":{
"unitname":"Austin",
"discounts":{"12-05-2012":"52.890000","12-02-2012":"22.430000","12-03-2012":"58.420000","12-04-2012":"53.130000"},
"gross":{"12-05-2012":"25.020000","12-02-2012":"2836.010000","12-03-2012":"54.740000","12-04-2012":"45.330000"},
"net":{"12-04-2012":"92.200000","12-05-2012":"72.130000","12-02-2012":"13.580000","12-03-2012":"96.320000"},
"discounts_total":186.87,
"gross_total":161.1,
"net_total":174.23,
"number":32402
}
}
I go over the function with a standard each call and do some awesome stuff with highcharts but now I'm trying to sort the responses by the net_total call and I can't figure it out.
I tried .sort() and it errors out that its not a function. I've been reading for a while but guess I'm not finding the right results. This looked promising: Sorting an array of JavaScript objects but it failed with the .sort is not a function. It seems most .sort are on [] arrays not full objects..
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Sorting objects doesn't make sense since object keys have no positional value. For example, this:
{ a:1, b:2 }
and this:
{ b:2, a:1 }
are exactly the same object. They're not just similar, they're the same.
Nothing in javascript per se gives object keys any positional value. Some people perhaps are mistaken in the belief that:
for (var key in obj) {
iterates through the object keys in a specific sequence. But this is wrong. You should always assume that the for .. in loop processes object keys in random order, always, all the time.
Obviously, if you're going to write a web browser, you're not going to implement a random number generator to parse a for .. in loop. Therefore most web browsers have an accidental stability to how the for .. in loop processes object keys.
Developers who learn javascript by playing around with the browser may figure out that their browser iterates through objects in alphabetical order for example, or the order the keys were added to the object. But this is totally accidental and cannot be relied upon. The browser vendor may change this behavior in the future without violating any backwards compatability (except with buggy scripts written by people who believe objects have a sort order). Not to mention that different browsers have different implementations of javascript and therefore not necessarily have the same internal key ordering of objects.
All the above is besides the point. "Key sort order" does not make any sense in javascript and any behavior observed is merely implementation detail. In short, javascript object does not have key order, just assume it's random.
Solution
Now, what you're really trying to do is not sort the object (you can't, it doesn't make sense). What you're really trying to do is process the object attributes in a specific order. The solution is to simply create an array (which has sorting order) of object keys and then process the object using that array:
// First create the array of keys/net_total so that we can sort it:
var sort_array = [];
for (var key in Response) {
sort_array.push({key:key,net_total:Response[key].net_total});
}
// Now sort it:
sort_array.sort(function(x,y){return x.net_total - y.net_total});
// Now process that object with it:
for (var i=0;i<sort_array.length;i++) {
var item = Response[sort_array[i].key];
// now do stuff with each item
}
What you have there isn't an array and has no order, so you'll have to transform it into an array so you can give it order.
Vaguely:
var array = [];
$.each(data, function(key, value) {
array.push(value);
});
array.sort(function(a, b) {
return a.net_total - b.net_total;
});
Live Example | Source
As GolezTroi points out in the comments, normally the above would lose the key that each entry is stored under in data and so you'd add it back in the first $.each loop above, but in this case the entries already have the key on them (as number), so there's no need.
Or you can replace the first $.each with $.map:
var array = $.map(data, function(entry) {
return entry;
});
// ...and then sort etc.
...whichever you prefer.