I know from the first look it sounds like duplicate question but i don't think it is...
I am receiving back a JSON array as:
var test1 = [] ;
or
var test2 = [{},{},{}] ; //This is empty
I have no problem finding out if test1 is empty.
jQuery.isEmptyObject(test1)
My problem is with the test2...
Please note that in some cases the test2 might return something like:
var test2 = [{"a":1},{},{}] ; //All these are not empty
var test2 = [{},{"a":1},{}] ; //All these are not empty
var test2 = [{},{},{"a":1}] ; //All these are not empty
The above scenarios shouldn't be counted as empty.I've tried to use .length but it's not helping as the length is always 3... Any ideas?
Cheers.
function isArrayEmpty(array) {
return array.filter(function(el) {
return !jQuery.isEmptyObject(el);
}).length === 0;
}
jsFiddle Demo
Passes all of your tests.
A pure JavaScript solution would be to replace !jQuery.isEmptyObject(el) with Object.keys(el).length !== 0
Edit: Using Array.prototype.every
function isArrayEmpty(array) {
return array.every(function(el) {
return jQuery.isEmptyObject(el);
});
}
For those playing at home, a non jQuery solution:
var test2 = [{a: 1},{},{}] ; //This is empty
function isEmpty(val) {
var len = val.length,
i;
if (len > 0) {
for (i = 0; i < len; ++i) {
if (!emptyObject(val[i])) {
return false;
}
}
}
return true;
}
function emptyObject(o) {
for (var key in o) {
if (o.hasOwnProperty(key)) {
return false;
}
}
return true;
}
console.log(isEmpty(test2));
Without JQuery: using Array.filter1 and Object.keys2:
function JSONEmpty(obj){
return !obj.length ||
!obj.filter(function(a){return Object.keys(a).length;}).length;
}
// usage
JSONEmpty([{"a":1},{},{}]); //=> false
JSONEmpty([{},{"a":1},{}]); //=> false
JSONEmpty([{},{},{"a":1}]); //=> false
JSONEmpty([]); //=> true
JSONEmpty([{},{},{}]); //=> true
update 2018 Arrow functions are now supported by all modern browsers, so like himel-nag-rana stipulated, you can also use:
const JSONEmpty = obj => !obj.length || !obj.filter(a => Object.keys(a).length).length;
1 More info
2 More info (links contain shims for older browsers)
I had the same problem, and I come with this solution without jQuery:
function isEmpty(x) {
for(var i in x) {
return false;
}
return true;
}
Pretty simple...
if(jQuery.isEmptyObject(test2[0]) && jQuery.isEmptyObject(test2[1]) && jQuery.isEmptyObject(test2[2])))
// do something
Maybe you could try use function like
function isEmptyObject (test) {
for (var i in test) {
if (!jQuery.isEmptyObject(test[i])
return false;
}
return true;
}
Here's my take: turn the array into a set and check for size.
var myArray = [1,2,3];
var mySet = new Set(myArray);
console.log(mySet.size === 0);
check by looping each values in array and return error
Try
for(i=0;js_array[i]!=null;i++)
{
if(js_array[i]=="")
{
alert("Empty");
}
}
Related
I'm wondering how to use an if statement in the JS find function? My goal here is when these values do not match to addClass("filtered-out") to the elements in my cars array.
cars.map(car => active_filters.find(x =>
if (car.attr(x.id) !== x.value)
return car.addClass("filtered-out");
));
I don't know logic you coded is true or not, but you can use simple loop and check condition.
cars.forEach(function(car) {
for (var i = 0; i < active_filters.length; i ++) {
if (car.attr(active_filters[i]['id']) !== active_filters[i]['value']) {
car.addClass("filtered-out");
break;
}
}
});
Or something like this
cars.forEach(function(car) {
var found = active_filters.find(function(el) {
return car.attr(el['id']) === el['value'];
});
if (!found) {
car.addClass("filtered-out");
}
});
Why is m "undefined" in this code:
currentViewModel = ko.mapping.fromJS(viewModel);
currentViewModel.getReport = function(reportId) {
for(var i=0;i<currentViewModel.availableReports().length;i++) {
if(currentViewModel.availableReports()[i].id == reportId) {
var m = currentViewModel.availableReports()[i];
return currentViewModel.availableReports()[i];
}
}
}
I call getReport() as an onclick event and I want to send the report object to a view (modal) I can do a foreach on the availableReports and it's all there. When I run through the debugger, it loops through the array and finds the right one. But why can't I pull it out of the array? "m" remains undefined the the function returns undefined.
What am I missing here?
EDIT: there is a follow up question here:
Can knockout.js wait to bind until an onClick?
You just need to change if(currentViewModel.availableReports()[i].id ... to if(currentViewModel.availableReports()[i].id() ... because after mapping id will become an observable, i.e. function.
Updated code:
currentViewModel = ko.mapping.fromJS(viewModel);
currentViewModel.getReport = function(reportId) {
for (var i = 0; i < currentViewModel.availableReports().length; i++) {
if (currentViewModel.availableReports()[i].id() == reportId) {
var m = currentViewModel.availableReports()[i];
return currentViewModel.availableReports()[i];
}
}
}
Demo - Fiddle.
I'll repeat the solution from #NikolayErmakov's answer here, but want to add two things to get a more complete answer. You end with:
...m remains undefined and the function returns undefined.
What am I missing here?
You're missing two things:
The var m bit of the first statement inside the if is hoisted to the top of the current scope (the top of the function). This is why the debugger can tell you what m is, even if you never reach the line of code it's on.
If a function invocation reaches the end of a function (as is the case for you, since you never go inside the if) without seeing an explicit return statement, it will return undefined.
To better understand this, you should interpret your function like this:
currentViewModel.getReport = function(reportId) {
var m;
for (var i = 0; i < currentViewModel.availableReports().length; i++) {
if (currentViewModel.availableReports()[i].id == reportId) {
m = currentViewModel.availableReports()[i];
return currentViewModel.availableReports()[i];
}
}
return undefined;
}
Some people (e.g. Douglas Crockford) do recommend placing var statements at the top of a function, though it's a matter of style to some degree. I don't think many people explicitly return undefined at the end of a function, though in your case I might be explicit about that scenario and return null (or throw an Error even).
As promised, I'll repeat the actual solution, as I concur with the other answer:
you need to invoke id as a function to get its value (because the mapping plugin will map to observable()s.
In addition:
I'd retrieve the array only once
I'd suggest using === instead of ==
Here's my v0.5 version:
currentViewModel.getReport = function(reportId) {
var m = null, reports = currentViewModel.availableReports();
for (var i = 0; i < reports.length; i++) {
if (reports[i].id() === reportId) {
m = reports[i];
return m;
}
}
return m;
}
But I'd optimize it to this v1.0:
currentViewModel.getReport = function(reportId) {
var reports = currentViewModel.availableReports();
for (var i = 0; i < reports.length; i++) {
if (reports[i].id() === reportId) {
return reports[i];
}
}
return null;
}
For completeness, here's another version that utilizes filter on arrays:
currentViewModel.getReport = function(reportId) {
var reports = currentViewModel.availableReports().filter(function(r) { return r.id() === reportId; });
return reports.length >= 1 ? reports[0] : null;
}
Let's say we have this JavaScript object:
var object = {
innerObject:{
deepObject:{
value:'Here am I'
}
}
};
How can we check if value property exists?
I can see only two ways:
First one:
if(object && object.innerObject && object.innerObject.deepObject && object.innerObject.deepObject.value) {
console.log('We found it!');
}
Second one:
if(object.hasOwnProperty('innerObject') && object.innerObject.hasOwnProperty('deepObject') && object.innerObject.deepObject.hasOwnProperty('value')) {
console.log('We found it too!');
}
But is there a way to do a deep check? Let's say, something like:
object['innerObject.deepObject.value']
or
object.hasOwnProperty('innerObject.deepObject.value')
There isn't a built-in way for this kind of check, but you can implement it easily. Create a function, pass a string representing the property path, split the path by ., and iterate over this path:
Object.prototype.hasOwnNestedProperty = function(propertyPath) {
if (!propertyPath)
return false;
var properties = propertyPath.split('.');
var obj = this;
for (var i = 0; i < properties.length; i++) {
var prop = properties[i];
if (!obj || !obj.hasOwnProperty(prop)) {
return false;
} else {
obj = obj[prop];
}
}
return true;
};
// Usage:
var obj = {
innerObject: {
deepObject: {
value: 'Here am I'
}
}
}
console.log(obj.hasOwnNestedProperty('innerObject.deepObject.value'));
You could make a recursive method to do this.
The method would iterate (recursively) on all 'object' properties of the object you pass in and return true as soon as it finds one that contains the property you pass in. If no object contains such property, it returns false.
var obj = {
innerObject: {
deepObject: {
value: 'Here am I'
}
}
};
function hasOwnDeepProperty(obj, prop) {
if (typeof obj === 'object' && obj !== null) { // only performs property checks on objects (taking care of the corner case for null as well)
if (obj.hasOwnProperty(prop)) { // if this object already contains the property, we are done
return true;
}
for (var p in obj) { // otherwise iterate on all the properties of this object.
if (obj.hasOwnProperty(p) && // and as soon as you find the property you are looking for, return true
hasOwnDeepProperty(obj[p], prop)) {
return true;
}
}
}
return false;
}
console.log(hasOwnDeepProperty(obj, 'value')); // true
console.log(hasOwnDeepProperty(obj, 'another')); // false
Alternative recursive function:
Loops over all object keys. For any key it checks if it is an object, and if so, calls itself recursively.
Otherwise, it returns an array with true, false, false for any key with the name propName.
The .reduce then rolls up the array through an or statement.
function deepCheck(obj,propName) {
if obj.hasOwnProperty(propName) { // Performance improvement (thanks to #nem's solution)
return true;
}
return Object.keys(obj) // Turns keys of object into array of strings
.map(prop => { // Loop over the array
if (typeof obj[prop] == 'object') { // If property is object,
return deepCheck(obj[prop],propName); // call recursively
} else {
return (prop == propName); // Return true or false
}
}) // The result is an array like [false, false, true, false]
.reduce(function(previousValue, currentValue, index, array) {
return previousValue || currentValue;
} // Do an 'or', or comparison of everything in the array.
// It returns true if at least one value is true.
)
}
deepCheck(object,'value'); // === true
PS: nem035's answer showed how it could be more performant: his solution breaks off at the first found 'value.'
My approach would be using try/catch blocks. Because I don't like to pass deep property paths in strings. I'm a lazy guy who likes autocompletion :)
JavaScript objects are evaluated on runtime. So if you return your object statement in a callback function, that statement is not going to be evaluated until callback function is invoked.
So this function just wraps the callback function inside a try catch statement. If it catches the exception returns false.
var obj = {
innerObject: {
deepObject: {
value: 'Here am I'
}
}
};
const validate = (cb) => {
try {
return cb();
} catch (e) {
return false;
}
}
if (validate(() => obj.innerObject.deepObject.value)) {
// Is going to work
}
if (validate(() => obj.x.y.z)) {
// Is not going to work
}
When it comes to performance, it's hard to say which approach is better.
On my tests if the object properties exist and the statement is successful I noticed using try/catch can be 2x 3x times faster than splitting string to keys and checking if keys exist in the object.
But if the property doesn't exist at some point, prototype approach returns the result almost 7x times faster.
See the test yourself: https://jsfiddle.net/yatki/382qoy13/2/
You can also check the library I wrote here: https://github.com/yatki/try-to-validate
I use try-catch:
var object = {
innerObject:{
deepObject:{
value:'Here am I'
}
}
};
var object2 = {
a: 10
}
let exist = false, exist2 = false;
try {
exist = !!object.innerObject.deepObject.value
exist2 = !!object2.innerObject.deepObject.value
}
catch(e) {
}
console.log(exist);
console.log(exist2);
Try this nice and easy solution:
public hasOwnDeepProperty(obj, path)
{
for (var i = 0, path = path.split('.'), len = path.length; i < len; i++)
{
obj = obj[path[i]];
if (!obj) return false;
};
return true;
}
In case you are writing JavaScript for Node.js, then there is an assert module with a 'deepEqual' method:
const assert = require('assert');
assert.deepEqual(testedObject, {
innerObject:{
deepObject:{
value:'Here am I'
}
}
});
I have created a very simple function for this using the recursive and happy flow coding strategy. It is also nice to add it to the Object.prototype (with enumerate:false!!) in order to have it available for all objects.
function objectHasOwnNestedProperty(obj, keys)
{
if (!obj || typeof obj !== 'object')
{
return false;
}
if(typeof keys === 'string')
{
keys = keys.split('.');
}
if(!Array.isArray(keys))
{
return false;
}
if(keys.length == 0)
{
return Object.keys(obj).length > 0;
}
var first_key = keys.shift();
if(!obj.hasOwnProperty(first_key))
{
return false;
}
if(keys.length == 0)
{
return true;
}
return objectHasOwnNestedProperty(obj[first_key],keys);
}
Object.defineProperty(Object.prototype, 'hasOwnNestedProperty',
{
value: function () { return objectHasOwnNestedProperty(this, ...arguments); },
enumerable: false
});
Guys, please don't answer me to use a JavaScript library to solve this problem, I'm using VanillaJS.
Suppose I have an array with 10,000 string records, same as following:
var arr = [
'John',
'Foo',
'Boo',
...
'Some',
'Beer'
];
Please note that the array doesn't follow any sort.
Now, I want to find items with oo in the text, what is the best way to do? Should I populate a new array or just pop items that don't match with the criteria?
You can make use of the filter method, which will create a new array with all the elements that passes the condition.
arr.filter(function(x){ return x.indexOf ('oo') > -1});
If you want to use filter method in every browser you could add the polyfill method (see link) in your code.
Another option (slightly faster) with basic javascript would be:
Looping trough the array with a simple for loop and test on your condition.
var filtered = [];
for(var i=0, length=arr.length; i<length; i++){
var current = arr[i];
if(current.indexOf('oo') > -1){
filtered.push(current);
}
}
my approch
forEach function
function forEach(array, action) {
for(var i=0; i<array.length; i++)
action(array[i]);
}
partial function
function asArray(quasiArray, start) {
var result = [];
for(var i = (start || 0); i < quasiArray.length; i++)
result.push(quasiArray[i]);
return result;
}
function partial(func) {
var fixedArgs = asArray(arguments, 1);
return function() {
return func.apply(null, fixedArgs.concat(asArray(arguments)));
};
}
contains method for String obj
if (!String.prototype.contains) {
String.prototype.contains = function (arg) {
return !!~this.indexOf(arg);
};
}
filter function:
function filter(test, array) {
var result = [];
forEach(array, function(element) {
if (test(element))
result.push(element);
});
return result;
}
test function for test array items
function test(key, el) {
return el.contains(key);
}
finally
filter(partial(test, 'oo'), arr);
NO shortcuts ( p.s. you said I want to find items , not filter - hence my answer)
simple loop :
var g=arr.length; //important since you have big array
for( var i=0;i<g;i++)
{
if ( g[i].indexOf('oo')>-1)
{
console.log(g[i]);
}
}
If you want to filter (without polyfill)
var g=arr.length; //important since you have big array
var h=[];
for( var i=0;i<g;i++)
{
if ( g[i].indexOf('oo')>-1)
{
h.push(g[i]);
}
}
//do something with h
A very simple way, use forEach:
var result = [];
arr.forEach(function (value) {
if (value.indexOf('oo') !== -1) {
result.push(value);
}
});
or map:
var result = [];
arr.map(function (value) {
if (value.indexOf('oo') !== -1) {
result.push(value);
}
});
Sorry for the title but I don't know how to explain it.
The function takes an URI, eg: /foo/bar/1293. The object will, in case it exists, be stored in an object looking like {foo: { bar: { 1293: 'content...' }}}. The function iterates through the directories in the URI and checks that the path isn't undefined and meanwhile builds up a string with the code that later on gets called using eval(). The string containing the code will look something like delete memory["foo"]["bar"]["1293"]
Is there any other way I can accomplish this? Maybe store the saved content in something other than
an ordinary object?
remove : function(uri) {
if(uri == '/') {
this.flush();
return true;
}
else {
var parts = trimSlashes(uri).split('/'),
memRef = memory,
found = true,
evalCode = 'delete memory';
parts.forEach(function(dir, i) {
if( memRef[dir] !== undefined ) {
memRef = memRef[dir];
evalCode += '["'+dir+'"]';
}
else {
found = false;
return false;
}
if(i == (parts.length - 1)) {
try {
eval( evalCode );
} catch(e) {
console.log(e);
found = false;
}
}
});
return found;
}
}
No need for eval here. Just drill down like you are and delete the property at the end:
parts.forEach(function(dir, i) {
if( memRef[dir] !== undefined ) {
if(i == (parts.length - 1)) {
// delete it on the last iteration
delete memRef[dir];
} else {
// drill down
memRef = memRef[dir];
}
} else {
found = false;
return false;
}
});
You just need a helper function which takes a Array and a object and does:
function delete_helper(obj, path) {
for(var i = 0, l=path.length-1; i<l; i++) {
obj = obj[path[i]];
}
delete obj[path.length-1];
}
and instead of building up a code string, append the names to a Array and then call this instead of the eval. This code assumes that the checks to whether the path exists have already been done as they would be in that usage.