Since typed arrays are just normal Arrays with typed values, they should also be considered "Arrays". But when I test if typed arrays are arrays, it returns false. For example:
var arr = new Int32Array(3);
Array.isArray(arr); //false
Does Array.isArray only check if arr is exactly a type Array object? How can I test if arr is an array, regardless of typed or not typed?
Typed Arrays are very different beasts than arrays. Arrays are generic collections, with loads of helper-methods for operating on those collections.
Typed Arrays were put in primarily to help with the browser version of OpenGL (though they obviously have other uses).
Try calling typedInt8Array.forEach()...
They're not the same thing.
So if you want a function which checks whether a variable/property is an array, or a typed array, then you will have to manually check the instanceof for each of the Int8Array|Int16Array|etc....
I'm partial to this trick:
obj.length === +obj.length; // true if it's an array
Since JavaScript Arrays have the special length property this is a pretty safe way to tell unless you have objects that you've defined a length property on manually.
Since Typed Arrays still have a length property, the old trick
obj.length === +obj.length
still works.
That means that length is a numeric property ( +v transforms a var to number, so if it's still === after the transform, then it was a number to begin with).
This is a solution I came up with:
isArray = /Array/.test(arr.constructor.name);
Related
This question already has answers here:
How to compare arrays in JavaScript?
(61 answers)
Why are two identical objects not equal to each other?
(9 answers)
Closed 2 years ago.
I started with:
"1:2".split(':') == ["1","2"];
// false
Then tried:
[1,2] == [1,2];
// false
and ultimately:
[] == [];
// false
I've since found that:
"1:2".split(':').toString() == [1,2].toString();
// true
So I've solved my initial issue (kind of) but why can't arrays match each other?
Javascript arrays are objects and you can't simply use the equality operator == to understand if the content of those objects is the same. The equality operator will only test if two object are actually exactly the same instance (e.g. myObjVariable==myObjVariable, works for null and undefined too).
If you need to check if two array are equals i'd recommend to just traverse both arrays and verify that all the elements have the same value (and that the two array have the same length).
Regarding custom objects equality i'd build instead a specific equals function and i'd add it to the prototype of your class.
Considering that in the end you converted both arrays to a String and tested equality of the resulting strings, you could one day consider using a similar but more generic technique you'll find described in more than a few places:
JSON.stringify(OBJ1) === JSON.stringify(OBJ2)
Well, don't.
While this could work if the order of the properties will always the same for those object instances, this leaves the door open for extremely nasty bugs that could be hard to track down. Always favor a more explicit approach and just write a clean and readable function that will test for equality checking all the required fields.
The == operator for Objects in Javascript only checks to see if the objects are the same actual object reference, not if they are two separate object that contain the same contents. There is no built in operator for checking if they contain the same contents. You would have to write a function to do that sort of comparison yourself.
Your string conversion is one way of comparing two arrays as long as the array elements only contain primitive values (not other objects). If the array elements could contain other elements, then you would have to make sure those objects were themselves converted into representative strings too.
And, converting to a string would not discern between an array element that contains "4" versus one that contains 4 since both convert to "4" in the string representation.
FYI, you can read in this answer about records and tuples, two new data types coming to future Javascript that will allow comparing an immutable version of arrays and objects by value instead of by only comparing to see if they are the same object.
Equality for objects will tell you if the two objects are the same one.
var a = [];
var b = a;
a === b; // True, a and b refer to the same object
[] === []; // False, two separate objects
You will have to loop through the arrays to see if they have the same elements.
See: How to check if two arrays are equal with JavaScript?
In javascript each [] is an instance of window.Array class. So you are basically trying to compare two different objects. Since array's can have any no. and any type of elements including Objects and Custom Objects and those nested arrays can again have numerous properties and arrays and so on.
It becomes ambiguous when it comes to comparison, you will never be sure what do you want to do with those objects and nested properties. So what you are trying to achieve by comparing can be done in so many other ways. You just have to figure out the right way for your case.
One way is to make your own Array checking function:
How to compare arrays in JavaScript?!
Another way is to convert the Array to a String with .join(), and compare the strings. Then convert them back into Arrays with .split().
If I relate this problem with that in Python:
Input:
a="1 2 3 4"
case I:
a=input.split(' ')
output: ['1', '2', '3', '4']
case II:
a=map(int,input.split(' '))
output: [1, 2, 3, 4]
So, the fault is that of type, as it could come-out aa 'true' for:
"1:2".split(':').toString() == [1,2].toString(); //true
I'm trying to learn Javascript - here's my issue:
In the w3schools.com javascript array examples, they show the sequent example:
var person = [];
person["firstName"] = "John";
person["lastName"] = "Doe";
person["age"] = 46;
document.getElementById("demo").innerHTML =
person[0] + " " + person.length;
An array "person" has been defined, but then they proceed to add some elements whit a "named" index. Then tries to print the HTML document the 0th element and the number of elements of the array, like you would do with a standard array.
The description says:
If you use a named index when accessing an array, JavaScript will
redefine the array to a standard object, and some array methods and
properties will produce undefined or incorrect results.
In fact, person[0] and person.length return respectively "undefined" and "0". Even is person was initially defined as an array, by inserting new named indexes elements, the array should be redefined as an object. But when i try do use the Array.isArray() method for checking it, it returns true:
var person = [];
person["firstName"] = "John";
person["lastName"] = "Doe";
person["age"] = 46;
document.getElementById("demo").innerHTML =
person[0] + " " + person.length;
document.getElementById('test').innerHTML = Array.isArray(person);// returns true
So, why? if, as specified by the tutorial, this has been effectively redefined as a standard object, and the ECMAScript 5 has added the .isArray() method for checking if something is an array and nothing else, shouldn't this return false insted of true?
I'm sure i missed something. If i define person like this:
person = {};
then it returns false, as expected. What is happening here? I just wanted to understand arrays a little bit more, this confuses me. Is this just a broken array, but still an array?
Here's the example (without the Array.isarray() bit, just the default): https://www.w3schools.com/js/tryit.asp?filename=tryjs_array_associative_2
First of all I want to note that the example you took from the w3schools page on arrays, is from the "Associative Arrays" section, which has this important introduction:
Many programming languages support arrays with named indexes.
Arrays with named indexes are called associative arrays (or hashes).
JavaScript does not support arrays with named indexes.
In JavaScript, arrays always use numbered indexes.
This puts the example into context, because it really makes no sense to define a variable as an array and then use string keys. But this was an example to illustrate the point.
Does an Array become an Object?
That JavaScript still considers the variable to be an array is as expected. It becomes an array at the moment of assignment of [], and that does not change by adding properties to that object. Yes, arrays are objects. They just have additional capabilities.
The array did not lose any of its array-like capabilities, but those features just don't work on those string properties, ... only on numerical ones (more precisely, the non-negative integer ones).
You loosely quoted the following statement from w3schools:
If you use named indexes, JavaScript will redefine the array to a standard object.
That is wrong information and leads to your misunderstanding. There is no redefinition happening. When you add properties to any object, then the object does not change "type". It remains an instance of what it was before... An array remains an array, a date object remains a date, a regex object remains a regex, even if you assign other properties to it. But non-numerical properties do not "count" for an array: the length will remain unchanged when you add such properties. The length only reveals something about the numerical properties of the object.
This quote is yet another illustration of what the JavaScript community thinks about w3schools.com, i.e. that it is not the most reliable reference, even though it has its value for learning the language.
Example of adding useful properties to arrays
Having said the above, there are cases where you may intentionally want to make use of such properties on arrays. Let's for example think of an array of words that is sorted:
const arr = ["apple", "banana", "grapefruit", "orange", "pear"];
Now let's add something to this array that denotes that it is currently sorted:
arr.isSorted = true;
We could imagine a function that would allow one to add a value to this array, but which also verifies if the array is still sorted:
function addFruit(arr, fruit) {
if (arr.length && fruit < arr[arr.length-1]) {
arr.sorted = false;
}
arr.push(fruit);
}
Then after having added several values, it would maybe be interesting to verify whether the array needs sorting:
if (!arr.sorted) arr.sort();
So this extra property helps to avoid executing an unnecessary sort. But for the rest the array has all the functionality as if it did not have that extra property.
An object that is set up as an array and then filled as an object becomes a member of both classes. Methods of the Array class will apply to its 'array-ness':
Array.isArray(person);
returns true. Methods of the Object class will apply to its 'object-ness':
typeof(person);
returns object. When it could be either one, the 'array-ness' will prevail, because the variable was first defined as an array:
console.log(person);
will put Array [ ] on the console, because it runs the Array class's logging method. It is displayed as an empty array, since it has no numbered elements, but you could add some:
person[2]=66;
and then console.log would log Array [ <2 empty slots>, 66 ].
I think the polyfill implementation of isArray() will clear your doubt by some extent.
#Polyfill
In my serialization code, I stumbled across a a stinky issue - as I loop through generic object properties, it also serializes array indexes, which is really not the plan - I serialize this data later on without saving the indexes in the stream.
[1].hasOwnProperty("0") // true
So my question is, why are array indexes considered own properties by the hasOwnProperty method? Is there even a way to tell property from array offset? A generic way that also works for TypedArray, HTMLElementCollection and whatever else?
Of course, this can be done, but it stinks:
for(var i in this) {
if(this.hasOwnProperty(i) &&
// If object is an array, we ignore the number offsets as they're not meant to be object properties
(typeof this.length!="number" || !(i<this.length) || i.length==0)) {
And yeah, the i.length==0 is there because you can actually do this:
var obj = {};
obj[""] = "something";
console.log(obj);
Yeah, you're welcome, enjoy your nightmares.
Arrays are objects, just slightly specialised. And as you have discovered, the indexes of an array are just properties called 0, 1, 2 etc.
On a really simple level, the length property just finds the highest numeric property and adds one.
You could make a slightly simpler way of filtering the keys, along the lines of
for (key in obj) {
if (isNaN(+key) && obj.hasOwnProperty(key)) {
doSomething()
}
}
Depends if you want to include the numeric properties of objects. It would be perfectly valid to do a = {'0': 'value'}, which is for the purpose of this exercise the same as b = ['value']. Although b has a length property and a does not, also b has all the other functions that come from being an array.
I've had a bit of a wakeup to the nature of JavaScript array indexes recently. Pursuing it, I found the following (I'm working with Node.js in interpretive mode here):
var x=[];
x['a']='a';
console.log(x); // Yields [ a: 'a' ]
console.log(x.length); // yields 0 not 1
x[1]=1;
console.log(x); // Yields [ , 1, a: 'a' ]
console.log(x.length); // Yields 2 not 3 (one for empty 0 space, one for the occupied 1 space)
Is a: 'a' really what it looks like - an object property embedded in an array - and, thus, isn't counted in the array property .length?
In JavaScript, arrays are just objects with some special properties, such as an automatic length property, and some methods attached (such as sort, pop, join, etc.). Indeed, a will not be counted in your array, since the length property of an array only stores the amount of elements with a property name that can be represented with a 32-bit positive integer.
And since arrays always automatically define every numbered element up to the highest element with a positive 32-bit int property name, this effectively means the length property stores 1 higher than the element with the highest 32-bit integer as a property name. Thanks #Felix Kling for correcting me about this in the comments.
Adding properties such as a is not forbidden at all, but you should watch out with them, since it might be confusing when reading your code.
There's also a difference in walking through the elements in the array:
To walk through all the numbered elements:
for (var i=0; i<myArray.length; i++) {
//do something
}
To walk through every property that's not built-in:
for (var i in myArray) {
//do something
}
Note that this loop will also include anything that's included from Array.prototype that's not a built-in method. So, if you were to add Array.prototype.sum = function() {/*...*/};, it will also be looped through.
To find out if the object you're using is indeed an array, and not just an object, you could perform the following test:
if (Object.prototype.toString.call(myObject) === '[object Array]') {
//myObject is an array
} else if (typeof myObject === 'object') {
//myObject is some other kind of object
}
See #artem's comment: myObject instanceof Array might not always work correctly.
That's correct, and it's a good illustration of the fact that that new Array you've created is really just a special kind of Object. In fact, typeof [] is 'object'! Setting a named property on it (which might be written more cleanly here as x.a = 'a') is really setting a new property to the object wrapper around your "real" array (numbered properties, really). They don't affect the length property for the same reason that the Array.isArray method doesn't.
Yes, that's correct. This works because pretty much everything in JavaScript is an object, including arrays and functions, which means that you can add your own arbitrary string properties. That's not you say that you should do this.
Arrays ([]) should be indexed using nonnegative integers. Objects ({}) should be "indexed" using strings.
This question already has answers here:
Closed 10 years ago.
Possible Duplicate:
Are Javascript arrays sparse?
I am learning JavaScript at the moment and have been reading some simple introductions and tutorials. While looking at the Array object I stumbled upon some details, which strike me as very odd, coming from other languages like C/Java/Scala/...
So lets assume we define an array as such:
var arr = ['foo','bar','qux']
We now assign
arr[5] = 'baz'
which results in our array looking like this:
arr
>> ["foo", "bar", "qux", undefined, undefined, "baz"]
And the length is as expected
arr.length
>> 6
JavaScript has kindly expanded our array to the needed length - six - and the new items are set to undefined - except for the one we actually assigned a value to.
From a low level point of view this is horrible memory-wise. Typically an array would be a continuous range in memory - making an array bigger generally involves copying the whole array to a new memory location, sufficient in size. This is a very costly operation.
Now, I do realize that this is likely not what JavaScript engines are doing, as copying around arrays would be crazy expensive and the memory space would be wasted on all these 'undefined' values.
Can someone tell me what actually happens behind the door?
Are arrays actually some sort linked lists?
Are the 'undefined' array items actually there?
How expensive is it to work with large arrays that are mostly filled with 'undefined'?
In the first version of JavaScript, there were no arrays. They were later introduced as a sub-class of that "mother of all objects": Object. You can test this quite easily by doing this:
var foo = [1,2,3,4];
for (var n in foo)
{//check if n is equal (value and type) to itself, coerced to a number
console.log(n === +(n) ? 'Number' : 'String');
}
This will log String, time and time again. Internally, all numeric keys are converted to strings. The Length property merely fetches the highest index, and adds 1 to it. Nothing more. When you display your array, the object is iterated, and for each key, the same rules apply as for any object: first the instance is scanned, then the prototype(s)... so if we alter our code a bit:
var foo = [1,2,3,4];
foo[9] = 5;
for (var n in foo)
{
if (foo.hasOwnProperty(n))
{//check if current key is an array property
console.log(n === +(n) ? 'Number' : 'String');
}
}
You'll notice the array only has 5 own properties, the undefined keys 4-8 are undefined, because there was no corresponding value found within the instance, nor in any of the underlying prototypes. In short: Arrays aren't really arrays, but objects that behave similarly.
As Tim remarked, you can have an array instance with an undefined property that does exist within that object:
var foo = [1,2,undefined,3];
console.log(foo[2] === undefined);//true
console.log(foo[99] === undefined);//true
But again, there is a difference:
console.log((foo.hasOwnProperty('2') && foo[2] === undefined));//true
console.log((foo.hasOwnProperty('99') && foo[99] === undefined));//false
RECAP, your three main questions:
Arrays are objects, that allow you to reference their properties with numeric instances
The undefined values are not there, they're merely the default return value when JS scans an object and the prototypes and can't find what you're looking for: "Sorry, what you ask me is undefined in my book." is what it says.
Working with largely undefined arrays doesn't affect the size of the object itself, but accessing an undefined key might be very, very marginally slower, because the prototypes have to be scanned, too.
Update:
Just quoting the Ecma std:
15.4 Array Objects
Array objects give special treatment to a certain class of property names. A property name P (in the form of a
String value) is an array index if and only if ToString(ToUint32(P)) is equal to P and ToUint32(P) is not equal to
2^32
1. A property whose property name is an array index is also called an element. Every Array object has a
length property whose value is always a nonnegative integer less than 2^32. The value of the length
property is numerically greater than the name of every property whose name is an array index; whenever a
property of an Array object is created or changed, other properties are adjusted as necessary to maintain this
invariant. Specifically, whenever a property is added whose name is an array index, the length property is
changed, if necessary, to be one more than the numeric value of that array index; and whenever the length
property is changed, every property whose name is an array index whose value is not smaller than the new
length is automatically deleted. This constraint applies only to own properties of an Array object and is
unaffected by length or array index properties that may be inherited from its prototypes.
An object, O, is said to be sparse if the following algorithm returns true:
1. Let len be the result of calling the [[Get]] internal method of O with argument "length".
2. For each integer i in the range 0≤i
a. Let elem be the result of calling the [[GetOwnProperty]] internal method of O with argument
ToString(i).
b. If elem is undefined, return true.
3. Return false.
Arrays are just an ordered list of objects. In JavaScript everything is an object, so arrays are not really arrays as we know them :)
You can find little internals here.
For your doubts about working with large arrays... Well, remember that the less calculation you make "client-side", the faster will be your page.
Answers:
An array in JavaScript is just the same as an object (i.e. an unordered collection of properties) with a magic length property and extra prototype methods (push() etc.)
No, the undefined items are not there. JavaScript has an in operator that test for the existence of a property that you can use to prove this. So for the following array: var arr = ['foo']; arr[2] = 'bar';, 2 in arr returns true and 1 in arr returns false.
A sparse array should take up no more memory than a dense array whose length is the number of properties actually defined in your sparse array. It will only be more expensive to work with a sparse array when you iterate over its undefined properties.
Most javascript implementations implement arrays as some flavor of binary tree or hash table with the array index as the key, so a large range of undefined objects does not use up any memory.
I was told that the arrays come in 2 parts, [value, pointer]. So the pointer of arr[2] is null. When you add a 5 it changes the address from null to point to number 3, which points to number 4, which points to number 5, which is null (so end of array).
Im not sure how true this is as ive never actually checked it. But it seems to make sense.
So you cant do the maths like on a c type array (ie to get to value 4 just do starting memory point + 4x (object amount in memory)) but you can do it by following the array peice by peice