Related
I've got a simple problem, but I'm struggling to find the easiest solution without transforming the array a hundred times.
I want to do a simple stacked graph in google sheets, with weeks on X and values on Y. I got the values for each week, but only for weeks, that have a value.
The values are all calculations I've done with google apps script/ js.
person1 = [[2019/37,2], [2019/42,3]] and so on, for multiple persons and for 80 weeks in total.
The num value is the total value after each week. So I want the array to be filled up with the missing weeks. Therefore I mapped this to another array, where I have all the weeks but no values, giving these weeks the value 0:
person1= [[2019/37,2],[2019/38,0],[2019/39,0],...,[2019/42,3],[2019/43,0],[2019/44,0],...]
This of course does not fit to see a progress in the graph.
So I need something to set the weeks, which were filled up, to the previous value, resulting in
person1= [[2019/37,2],[2019/38,2],[2019/39,2],...,[2019/42,3],[2019/43,3],[2019/44,3],...]
Looping through this and setting the values with something like person[i][1] == person[i-1][1] seems not to be a good practice of course.
So, what would be the best way to achieve this? I'm kind of stuck with this now, I feel like I don't see the forest for the trees.
Thanks in advance!
code:
let valueArray = [[2019/37,2], [2019/42,3]]
let weeksArray = [2019/38,2019/39,2019/40,2019/41...]
//find missing weeks
let notFound = weeksArray.filter(el => valueArray.includes(el) == false).map(x => [x,0]);
//concat and sort
let outArray = arr.concat(notFound).sort((a,b)=> a[0].localeCompare(b[0]));
//output:
//[[2019/37,2],[2019/38,0],[2019/39,0],...,[2019/42,3],[2019/43,0],[2019/44,0],...]
Solution:
Since you already have the expanded array, you can use map on the whole array and use a function to replace the values:
var weeks = [[2019/37,2],[2019/38,0],[2019/39,0],[2019/40,3],[2019/41,0],[2019/42,4],[2019/43,0],[2019/44,0]];
weeks.map((a,b)=>{weeks[b][1] = (a[1] == 0 && b > 0) ? weeks[b-1][1] : weeks[b][1]});
To make it more readable, this is the same as:
weeks.forEach(function missing(item,index,arr) {
if (item[1] == 0 && index > 0) {
arr[index][1] = arr[index-1][1];
}
}
);
Console log:
References:
Arrow Functions
Conditional Operator
Array.prototype.map()
function fixArray() {
var array = [["2019/1", "1"], ["2019/10", "2"], ["2019/20", "3"], ["2019/30", "4"], ["2019/40", "5"]];
var oA = [];
array.forEach(function (r, i) {
oA.push(r);
let t1 = r[0].split('/');
let diff;
if (i + 1 < array.length) {
let inc = 1;
let t2 = array[i + 1][0].split('/');
if (t1[0] == t2[0] && t2[1] - t1[1] > 1) {
do {
let t3 = ['', ''];
t3[0] = t1[0] + '/' + Number(parseInt(t1[1]) + inc);
t3[1] = r[1];
diff = t2[1] - t1[1] - inc;
oA.push(t3);
inc++;
} while (diff > 1);
}
}
});
let end = "is near";
console.log(JSON.stringify(oA));
}
console.log:
[["2019/1","1"],["2019/2","1"],["2019/3","1"],["2019/4","1"],["2019/5","1"],["2019/6","1"],["2019/7","1"],["2019/8","1"],["2019/9","1"],["2019/10","2"],["2019/11","2"],["2019/12","2"],["2019/13","2"],["2019/14","2"],["2019/15","2"],["2019/16","2"],["2019/17","2"],["2019/18","2"],["2019/19","2"],["2019/20","3"],["2019/21","3"],["2019/22","3"],["2019/23","3"],["2019/24","3"],["2019/25","3"],["2019/26","3"],["2019/27","3"],["2019/28","3"],["2019/29","3"],["2019/30","4"],["2019/31","4"],["2019/32","4"],["2019/33","4"],["2019/34","4"],["2019/35","4"],["2019/36","4"],["2019/37","4"],["2019/38","4"],["2019/39","4"],["2019/40","5"]]
So, I have successfully written the Fibonacci sequence to create an array with the sequence of numbers, but I need to know the length (how many digits) the 500th number has.
I've tried the below code, but its finding the length of the scientific notation (22 digits), not the proper 105 it should be returning.
Any ideas how to convert a scientific notation number into an actual integer?
var fiblength = function fiblength(nth) {
var temparr = [0,1];
for(var i = 2; i<=nth; i++){
var prev = temparr[temparr.length-2],
cur = temparr[temparr.length-1],
next = prev + cur;
temparr.push(next);
}
var final = temparr[temparr.length-1].toString().length;
console.log(temparr[temparr.length-1]);
return final;
};
a = fiblength(500);
console.log(a);
Why not use the simple procedure of dividing the number by 10 until the number is less than 1.
Something as simple as this should work (a recursive def obv works as well)
function getDigits(n) {
var digits = 0;
while(n >= 1) {
n/=10;
digits += 1;
}
return digits;
}
getDigits(200);//3
getDigits(3.2 * 10e20);//=>22
Here's a solution in constant time:
function fiblength(n) {
return Math.floor((n>1)?n*.2089+.65051:1);
}
Let's explain how I arrived to it.
All previous solutions will probably not work for N>300 unless you have a BigNumber library in place. Also they're pretty inneficient.
There is a formula to get any Fibonacci number, which uses PHI (golden ratio number), it's very simple:
F(n) = ABS((PHI^n)/sqrt(5))
Where PHI=1.61803399 (golden ratio, found all over the fibonacci sequence)
If you want to know how many digits a number has, you calculate the log base 10 and add 1 to that. Let's call that function D(n) = log10(n) + 1
So what you want fiblength to be is in just the following function
fiblength(n) = D(F(n)) // number of digits of a fibonacci number...
Let's work it out, so you see what the one liner code will be like once you use math.
Substitute F(n)
fiblength(n) = D(ABS((PHI^n)/sqrt(5)))
Now apply D(n) on that:
fiblength(n) = log10(ABS((PHI^n)/sqrt(5))) + 1
So, since log(a/b) = log(a) - log(b)
fiblength(n) = log10(ABS((PHI^n))) - log10(sqrt(5))) + 1
and since log(a^n) = n * log(a)
fiblength(n) = n*log10(PHI) - log10(sqrt(5))) + 1
Then we evaluate those logarithms since they're all on constants
and add the special cases of n=0 and n=1 to return 1
function fiblength(n) {
return Math.floor((n>1)?n*.2089+.65051:1);
}
Enjoy :)
fiblength(500) => 105 //no iterations necessary.
Most of the javascript implementations, internally use 64 bit numbers. So, if the number we are trying to represent is very big, it uses scientific notation to represent those numbers. So, there is no pure "javascript numbers" based solution for this. You may have to look for other BigNum libraries.
As far as your code is concerned, you want only the 500th number, so you don't have to store the entire array of numbers in memory, just previous and current numbers are enough.
function fiblength(nth) {
var previous = 0, current = 1, temp;
for(var i = 2; i<=nth; i++){
temp = current;
current = previous + current;
previous = temp;
}
return current;
};
My Final Solution
function fiblength(nth) {
var a = 0, b = 1, c;
for(var i=2;i<=nth;i++){
c=b;
b=a+b;
a=c;
}
return Math.floor(Math.log(b)/Math.log(10))+1;
}
console.log(fiblength(500));
Thanks for the help!!!
The problem is because the resulting number was converted into a string before any meaningful calculations could be made. Here's how it could have been solved in the original code:
var fiblength = function fiblength(nth) {
var temparr = [0,1];
for(var i = 2; i<=nth; i++){
var prev = temparr[temparr.length-2],
cur = temparr[temparr.length-1],
next = prev + cur;
temparr.push(next);
}
var x = temparr[temparr.length-1];
console.log(x);
var length = 1;
while (x > 1) {
length = length + 1;
x = x/10;
}
return length;
};
console.log ( fiblength(500) );
I have created a working javascript function to check an array of 5 numbers for a small straight, in a Yahtzee game I'm making. I've tested it to no end and I'm confident it works 100% of the time, but it is also probably the worst algorithm of all time in terms of being efficient. Here is what it looks like:
function calcSmstraight() {
var sum = 0;
var r = new Array();
var r2 = new Array();
var counter = 0;
var temp;
var bool = false;
var bool2 = false;
r[0] = document.getElementById('setKeep1').value;
r[1] = document.getElementById('setKeep2').value;
r[2] = document.getElementById('setKeep3').value;
r[3] = document.getElementById('setKeep4').value;
r[4] = document.getElementById('setKeep5').value;
// Move non-duplicates to new array
r2[0] = r[0];
for(var i=0; i<r.length; i++) {
for(var j=0; j<r2.length; j++) {
if(r[i] == r2[j]) {
bool2 = true; // Already in new list
}
}
// Add to new list if not already in it
if(!bool2) {
r2.push(r[i]);
}
bool2 = false;
}
// Make sure list has at least 4 different numbers
if(r2.length >= 4) {
// Sort dice from least to greatest
while(counter < r2.length) {
if(r2[counter] > r2[counter+1]) {
temp = r2[counter];
r2[counter] = r2[counter+1];
r2[counter+1] = temp;
counter = 0;
} else {
counter++;
}
}
// Check if the dice are in order
if(((r2[0] == (r2[1]-1)) && (r2[1] == (r2[2]-1)) && (r2[2] == (r2[3]-1)))
|| ((r2[1] == (r2[2]-1)) && (r2[2] == (r2[3]-1)) && (r2[3] == (r2[4]-1)))) {
bool = true;
}
}
if(bool) {
// If small straight give 30 points
sum = 30;
}
return sum;
}
My strategy is to:
1) Remove duplicates by adding numbers to a new array as they occur
2) Make sure the new array is at least 4 in length (4 different numbers)
3) Sort the array from least to greatest
4) Check if the first 4 OR last 4 (if 5 in length) numbers are in order
My question:
Does anyone know a way that I can improve this method? It seems ridiculously terrible to me but I can't think of a better way to do this and it at least works.
Given that you're implementing a Yahtzee game you presumably need to test for other patterns beyond just small straights, so it would be better to create the array of values before calling the function so that you can use them in all tests, rather than getting the values from the DOM elements inside the small straight test.
Anyway, here's the first way that came to my mind to test for a small straight within an array representing the values of five six-sided dice:
// assume r is an array with the values from the dice
r.sort();
if (/1234|2345|3456/.test(r.join("").replace(/(.)\1/,"$1") {
// is a small straight
}
Note that you can sort an array of numbers using this code:
r2.sort(function(a,b){return a-b;});
...but in your case the values in the array are strings because they came from the .value attribute of DOM elements, so a default string sort will work with r2.sort(). Either way you don't need your own sort routine, because JavaScript provides one.
EDIT: If you assume that you can just put the five values as a string as above you can implement tests for all possible combinations as a big if/else like this:
r.sort();
r = r.join("");
if (/(.)\1{4}/.test(r)) {
alert("Five of a Kind");
} else if (/(.)\1{3}/.test(r)) {
alert("Four of a Kind");
} else if (/(.)\1{2}(.)\2|(.)\3(.)\4{2}/.test(r)) {
alert("Full House");
} else if (/(.)\1{2}/.test(r)) {
alert("Three of a Kind");
} else if (/1234|2345|3456/.test( r.replace(/(.)\1/,"$1") ) {
alert("Small Straight");
} // etc.
Demo: http://jsfiddle.net/4Qzfw/
Why don't you just have a six-element array of booleans indicating whether a number is present, then check 1-4, 2-5, and 3-6 for being all true? In pseudocode:
numFlags = array(6);
foreach(dice)
numFlags[die.value-1] = true;
if(numFlags[0] && numFlags[1] && numFlags[2] && numFlags[3]) return true
//Repeat for 1-4 and 2-5
return false
This wouldn't be a useful algorithm if you were using million-sided dice, but for six-siders there are only three possible small straights to check for, so it's simple and straightforward.
I do not play Yahtzee, but I do play cards, and it would appear the algorithm might be similar. This routine, written in ActionScript (my JavaScript is a bit rusty) has been compiled but not tested. It should accept 5 cards for input, and return a message for either straights greater than 3 cards or pairs or higher.
private function checkCards(card1:int,card2:int,card3:int,card4:int,card5:int):String
{
// Assumes that the 5 cards have a value between 0-12 (Ace-King)
//The key to the routine is using the card values as pointers into an array of possible card values.
var aryCardValues:Array = new Array(0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0);
aryCardValues[card1] += 1;
aryCardValues[card1] += 1;
aryCardValues[card1] += 1;
aryCardValues[card1] += 1;
aryCardValues[card1] += 1;
var aryCardNames:Array = new Array("Ace", "2", "3", "4", "5", "6", "7", "8", "9", "10", "Jack", "Queen", "King");
var strOutMessage:String;
var intCardCount:int = 0;
var strSeperator:String;
var strHighCard:String;
for (var i:int = 0;i < aryCardValues.length;i++)
{
//Check for runs of three of a kind or greater.
if (aryCardValues[i] >= 2)
{
strOutMessage = strOutMessage + strSeperator + i + "-" + aryCardNames[i] + "s";
strSeperator = " & ";
}
//Check for values in a straight.
if (aryCardValues[i] > 0)
{
intCardCount++;
if (intCardCount > 3)strHighCard = aryCardNames[i];
}
else
{
if (intCardCount < 3)intCardCount = 0;
}
}
if (intCardCount > 3) strOutMessage = intCardCount + " run " + strHighCard + " High."
return strOutMessage;
}
It may not be as concise as the regular expressions used above, but it might be more readable and easily modified. One change that could be made is to pass in an array of cards rather than discrete variables for each card.
How can I compare two floats in JavaScript? Or perhaps a float and an int.
if (5 > 4.3.3)
if (5.0 > 5.3)
Thankful for all input!
Update
I need to for an iPhone app that I am developing in Appcelerator. I need to compare iOS versions and display different content to each. So if a device is running 5.0 and another is running 4.3.3 I need to know the difference in my code.
Just like that.
if (5.0 > 5.3)
In your 1st example you do not have a valid number [4.3.3].
You may use something along the lines of http://maymay.net/blog/2008/06/15/ridiculously-simple-javascript-version-string-to-object-parser/
Basically he uses:
function parseVersionString (str) {
if (typeof(str) != 'string') { return false; }
var x = str.split('.');
// parse from string or default to 0 if can't parse
var maj = parseInt(x[0]) || 0;
var min = parseInt(x[1]) || 0;
var pat = parseInt(x[2]) || 0;
return {
major: maj,
minor: min,
patch: pat
}
}
Basic comparator can look like:
1. Convert to correct positional structure
2. Compare lengths
3. Compare values
function compareVer(a, b, sep = '.') {
// 1. Convert to correct positional structure
const aP = a.split(sep);
const bP = b.split(sep);
// 2. Compare lengths
if (aP.length > bP) return 1;
if (bP.length > aP) return -1;
for (let i = 0; i < aP.length; ++i) {
// 3. Compare values
// You can add necessary type conversions
// Ex.: add parseInt, if you want to support `001=1` and not `3f=3f`
if (aP[i] > bP[i]) return 1;
if (bP[i] > aP[i]) return -1;
}
return 0;
}
console.log(compareVer('5', '4.3.3')); // 1 gt
console.log(compareVer('5.0.2', '5.0.2')); // 0 eq
console.log(compareVer('5.0', '5.3')); // -1 lt
What is the recommended way to zerofill a value in JavaScript? I imagine I could build a custom function to pad zeros on to a typecasted value, but I'm wondering if there is a more direct way to do this?
Note: By "zerofilled" I mean it in the database sense of the word (where a 6-digit zerofilled representation of the number 5 would be "000005").
I can't believe all the complex answers on here... Just use this:
var zerofilled = ('0000'+n).slice(-4);
let n = 1
var zerofilled = ('0000'+n).slice(-4);
console.log(zerofilled)
Simple way. You could add string multiplication for the pad and turn it into a function.
var pad = "000000";
var n = '5';
var result = (pad+n).slice(-pad.length);
As a function,
function paddy(num, padlen, padchar) {
var pad_char = typeof padchar !== 'undefined' ? padchar : '0';
var pad = new Array(1 + padlen).join(pad_char);
return (pad + num).slice(-pad.length);
}
var fu = paddy(14, 5); // 00014
var bar = paddy(2, 4, '#'); // ###2
Since ECMAScript 2017 we have padStart:
const padded = (.1 + "").padStart(6, "0");
console.log(`-${padded}`);
Before ECMAScript 2017
With toLocaleString:
var n=-0.1;
var res = n.toLocaleString('en', {minimumIntegerDigits:4,minimumFractionDigits:2,useGrouping:false});
console.log(res);
I actually had to come up with something like this recently.
I figured there had to be a way to do it without using loops.
This is what I came up with.
function zeroPad(num, numZeros) {
var n = Math.abs(num);
var zeros = Math.max(0, numZeros - Math.floor(n).toString().length );
var zeroString = Math.pow(10,zeros).toString().substr(1);
if( num < 0 ) {
zeroString = '-' + zeroString;
}
return zeroString+n;
}
Then just use it providing a number to zero pad:
> zeroPad(50,4);
"0050"
If the number is larger than the padding, the number will expand beyond the padding:
> zeroPad(51234, 3);
"51234"
Decimals are fine too!
> zeroPad(51.1234, 4);
"0051.1234"
If you don't mind polluting the global namespace you can add it to Number directly:
Number.prototype.leftZeroPad = function(numZeros) {
var n = Math.abs(this);
var zeros = Math.max(0, numZeros - Math.floor(n).toString().length );
var zeroString = Math.pow(10,zeros).toString().substr(1);
if( this < 0 ) {
zeroString = '-' + zeroString;
}
return zeroString+n;
}
And if you'd rather have decimals take up space in the padding:
Number.prototype.leftZeroPad = function(numZeros) {
var n = Math.abs(this);
var zeros = Math.max(0, numZeros - n.toString().length );
var zeroString = Math.pow(10,zeros).toString().substr(1);
if( this < 0 ) {
zeroString = '-' + zeroString;
}
return zeroString+n;
}
Cheers!
XDR came up with a logarithmic variation that seems to perform better.
WARNING: This function fails if num equals zero (e.g. zeropad(0, 2))
function zeroPad (num, numZeros) {
var an = Math.abs (num);
var digitCount = 1 + Math.floor (Math.log (an) / Math.LN10);
if (digitCount >= numZeros) {
return num;
}
var zeroString = Math.pow (10, numZeros - digitCount).toString ().substr (1);
return num < 0 ? '-' + zeroString + an : zeroString + an;
}
Speaking of performance, tomsmeding compared the top 3 answers (4 with the log variation). Guess which one majorly outperformed the other two? :)
Modern browsers now support padStart, you can simply now do:
string.padStart(maxLength, "0");
Example:
string = "14";
maxLength = 5; // maxLength is the max string length, not max # of fills
res = string.padStart(maxLength, "0");
console.log(res); // prints "00014"
number = 14;
maxLength = 5; // maxLength is the max string length, not max # of fills
res = number.toString().padStart(maxLength, "0");
console.log(res); // prints "00014"
Here's what I used to pad a number up to 7 characters.
("0000000" + number).slice(-7)
This approach will probably suffice for most people.
Edit: If you want to make it more generic you can do this:
("0".repeat(padding) + number).slice(-padding)
Edit 2: Note that since ES2017 you can use String.prototype.padStart:
number.toString().padStart(padding, "0")
Unfortunately, there are a lot of needless complicated suggestions for this problem, typically involving writing your own function to do math or string manipulation or calling a third-party utility. However, there is a standard way of doing this in the base JavaScript library with just one line of code. It might be worth wrapping this one line of code in a function to avoid having to specify parameters that you never want to change like the local name or style.
var amount = 5;
var text = amount.toLocaleString('en-US',
{
style: 'decimal',
minimumIntegerDigits: 3,
useGrouping: false
});
This will produce the value of "005" for text. You can also use the toLocaleString function of Number to pad zeros to the right side of the decimal point.
var amount = 5;
var text = amount.toLocaleString('en-US',
{
style: 'decimal',
minimumFractionDigits: 2,
useGrouping: false
});
This will produce the value of "5.00" for text. Change useGrouping to true to use comma separators for thousands.
Note that using toLocaleString() with locales and options arguments is standardized separately in ECMA-402, not in ECMAScript. As of today, some browsers only implement basic support, i.e. toLocaleString() may ignore any arguments.
Complete Example
If the fill number is known in advance not to exceed a certain value, there's another way to do this with no loops:
var fillZeroes = "00000000000000000000"; // max number of zero fill ever asked for in global
function zeroFill(number, width) {
// make sure it's a string
var input = number + "";
var prefix = "";
if (input.charAt(0) === '-') {
prefix = "-";
input = input.slice(1);
--width;
}
var fillAmt = Math.max(width - input.length, 0);
return prefix + fillZeroes.slice(0, fillAmt) + input;
}
Test cases here: http://jsfiddle.net/jfriend00/N87mZ/
The quick and dirty way:
y = (new Array(count + 1 - x.toString().length)).join('0') + x;
For x = 5 and count = 6 you'll have y = "000005"
Here's a quick function I came up with to do the job. If anyone has a simpler approach, feel free to share!
function zerofill(number, length) {
// Setup
var result = number.toString();
var pad = length - result.length;
while(pad > 0) {
result = '0' + result;
pad--;
}
return result;
}
ECMAScript 2017:
use padStart or padEnd
'abc'.padStart(10); // " abc"
'abc'.padStart(10, "foo"); // "foofoofabc"
'abc'.padStart(6,"123465"); // "123abc"
More info:
https://github.com/tc39/proposal-string-pad-start-end
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/String/padStart
I often use this construct for doing ad-hoc padding of some value n, known to be a positive, decimal:
(offset + n + '').substr(1);
Where offset is 10^^digits.
E.g., padding to 5 digits, where n = 123:
(1e5 + 123 + '').substr(1); // => 00123
The hexadecimal version of this is slightly more verbose:
(0x100000 + 0x123).toString(16).substr(1); // => 00123
Note 1: I like #profitehlolz's solution as well, which is the string version of this, using slice()'s nifty negative-index feature.
I really don't know why, but no one did it in the most obvious way. Here it's my implementation.
Function:
/** Pad a number with 0 on the left */
function zeroPad(number, digits) {
var num = number+"";
while(num.length < digits){
num='0'+num;
}
return num;
}
Prototype:
Number.prototype.zeroPad=function(digits){
var num=this+"";
while(num.length < digits){
num='0'+num;
}
return(num);
};
Very straightforward, I can't see any way how this can be any simpler. For some reason I've seem many times here on SO, people just try to avoid 'for' and 'while' loops at any cost. Using regex will probably cost way more cycles for such a trivial 8 digit padding.
In all modern browsers you can use
numberStr.padStart(numberLength, "0");
function zeroFill(num, numLength) {
var numberStr = num.toString();
return numberStr.padStart(numLength, "0");
}
var numbers = [0, 1, 12, 123, 1234, 12345];
numbers.forEach(
function(num) {
var numString = num.toString();
var paddedNum = zeroFill(numString, 5);
console.log(paddedNum);
}
);
Here is the MDN reference https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/String/padStart
I use this snippet to get a five-digits representation:
(value+100000).toString().slice(-5) // "00123" with value=123
The power of Math!
x = integer to pad
y = number of zeroes to pad
function zeroPad(x, y)
{
y = Math.max(y-1,0);
var n = (x / Math.pow(10,y)).toFixed(y);
return n.replace('.','');
}
This is the ES6 solution.
function pad(num, len) {
return '0'.repeat(len - num.toString().length) + num;
}
alert(pad(1234,6));
Not that this question needs more answers, but I thought I would add the simple lodash version of this.
_.padLeft(number, 6, '0')
I didn't see anyone point out the fact that when you use String.prototype.substr() with a negative number it counts from the right.
A one liner solution to the OP's question, a 6-digit zerofilled representation of the number 5, is:
console.log(("00000000" + 5).substr(-6));
Generalizing we'll get:
function pad(num, len) { return ("00000000" + num).substr(-len) };
console.log(pad(5, 6));
console.log(pad(45, 6));
console.log(pad(345, 6));
console.log(pad(2345, 6));
console.log(pad(12345, 6));
Don't reinvent the wheel; use underscore string:
jsFiddle
var numToPad = '5';
alert(_.str.pad(numToPad, 6, '0')); // Yields: '000005'
After a, long, long time of testing 15 different functions/methods found in this questions answers, I now know which is the best (the most versatile and quickest).
I took 15 functions/methods from the answers to this question and made a script to measure the time taken to execute 100 pads. Each pad would pad the number 9 with 2000 zeros. This may seem excessive, and it is, but it gives you a good idea about the scaling of the functions.
The code I used can be found here:
https://gist.github.com/NextToNothing/6325915
Feel free to modify and test the code yourself.
In order to get the most versatile method, you have to use a loop. This is because with very large numbers others are likely to fail, whereas, this will succeed.
So, which loop to use? Well, that would be a while loop. A for loop is still fast, but a while loop is just slightly quicker(a couple of ms) - and cleaner.
Answers like those by Wilco, Aleksandar Toplek or Vitim.us will do the job perfectly.
Personally, I tried a different approach. I tried to use a recursive function to pad the string/number. It worked out better than methods joining an array but, still, didn't work as quick as a for loop.
My function is:
function pad(str, max, padder) {
padder = typeof padder === "undefined" ? "0" : padder;
return str.toString().length < max ? pad(padder.toString() + str, max, padder) : str;
}
You can use my function with, or without, setting the padding variable. So like this:
pad(1, 3); // Returns '001'
// - Or -
pad(1, 3, "x"); // Returns 'xx1'
Personally, after my tests, I would use a method with a while loop, like Aleksandar Toplek or Vitim.us. However, I would modify it slightly so that you are able to set the padding string.
So, I would use this code:
function padLeft(str, len, pad) {
pad = typeof pad === "undefined" ? "0" : pad + "";
str = str + "";
while(str.length < len) {
str = pad + str;
}
return str;
}
// Usage
padLeft(1, 3); // Returns '001'
// - Or -
padLeft(1, 3, "x"); // Returns 'xx1'
You could also use it as a prototype function, by using this code:
Number.prototype.padLeft = function(len, pad) {
pad = typeof pad === "undefined" ? "0" : pad + "";
var str = this + "";
while(str.length < len) {
str = pad + str;
}
return str;
}
// Usage
var num = 1;
num.padLeft(3); // Returns '001'
// - Or -
num.padLeft(3, "x"); // Returns 'xx1'
First parameter is any real number, second parameter is a positive integer specifying the minimum number of digits to the left of the decimal point and third parameter is an optional positive integer specifying the number if digits to the right of the decimal point.
function zPad(n, l, r){
return(a=String(n).match(/(^-?)(\d*)\.?(\d*)/))?a[1]+(Array(l).join(0)+a[2]).slice(-Math.max(l,a[2].length))+('undefined'!==typeof r?(0<r?'.':'')+(a[3]+Array(r+1).join(0)).slice(0,r):a[3]?'.'+a[3]:''):0
}
so
zPad(6, 2) === '06'
zPad(-6, 2) === '-06'
zPad(600.2, 2) === '600.2'
zPad(-600, 2) === '-600'
zPad(6.2, 3) === '006.2'
zPad(-6.2, 3) === '-006.2'
zPad(6.2, 3, 0) === '006'
zPad(6, 2, 3) === '06.000'
zPad(600.2, 2, 3) === '600.200'
zPad(-600.1499, 2, 3) === '-600.149'
The latest way to do this is much simpler:
var number = 2
number.toLocaleString(undefined, {minimumIntegerDigits:2})
output: "02"
Just another solution, but I think it's more legible.
function zeroFill(text, size)
{
while (text.length < size){
text = "0" + text;
}
return text;
}
This one is less native, but may be the fastest...
zeroPad = function (num, count) {
var pad = (num + '').length - count;
while(--pad > -1) {
num = '0' + num;
}
return num;
};
My solution
Number.prototype.PadLeft = function (length, digit) {
var str = '' + this;
while (str.length < length) {
str = (digit || '0') + str;
}
return str;
};
Usage
var a = 567.25;
a.PadLeft(10); // 0000567.25
var b = 567.25;
b.PadLeft(20, '2'); // 22222222222222567.25
With ES6+ JavaScript:
You can "zerofill a number" with something like the following function:
/**
* #param number The number
* #param minLength Minimal length for your string with leading zeroes
* #return Your formatted string
*/
function zerofill(nb, minLength) {
// Convert your number to string.
let nb2Str = nb.toString()
// Guess the number of zeroes you will have to write.
let nbZeroes = Math.max(0, minLength - nb2Str.length)
// Compute your result.
return `${ '0'.repeat(nbZeroes) }${ nb2Str }`
}
console.log(zerofill(5, 6)) // Displays "000005"
With ES2017+:
/**
* #param number The number
* #param minLength Minimal length for your string with leading zeroes
* #return Your formatted string
*/
const zerofill = (nb, minLength) => nb.toString().padStart(minLength, '0')
console.log(zerofill(5, 6)) // Displays "000005"
Use recursion:
function padZero(s, n) {
s = s.toString(); // In case someone passes a number
return s.length >= n ? s : padZero('0' + s, n);
}
Some monkeypatching also works
String.prototype.padLeft = function (n, c) {
if (isNaN(n))
return null;
c = c || "0";
return (new Array(n).join(c).substring(0, this.length-n)) + this;
};
var paddedValue = "123".padLeft(6); // returns "000123"
var otherPadded = "TEXT".padLeft(8, " "); // returns " TEXT"
function pad(toPad, padChar, length){
return (String(toPad).length < length)
? new Array(length - String(toPad).length + 1).join(padChar) + String(toPad)
: toPad;
}
pad(5, 0, 6) = 000005
pad('10', 0, 2) = 10 // don't pad if not necessary
pad('S', 'O', 2) = SO
...etc.
Cheers