Hash/associative array using several objects as key - javascript

Is there a way of making an associative array where each key is a hash of several objects? I'm not interested in inspecting each object's state, but rather the object's identity.
var myarray = {};
var a = new A();
var b = new B();
var c = new C();
// + is not right, but illustrates the hashing I'm after.
myarray[a + b + c] = 42;
The + operator is not right. In java I would arithmetically combine the System.identityHashCode() for each of these three instances and use the result to make my new hash key. Is there some similar mechanic in javascript?
Overriding the .toString() method in A, B and C is not an option since I'm interested in object identity, not state.

Actually impossible since Object keys in this language only can be strings and there's no equivalent of java's object identity.
:o)

You could overwrite the toString() method of the prototypes to create a unique hash for each instance. E.g.
A.prototype.toString = function() {
return /* something instance specific here */;
};
Even a + b + c would work then.
Update: Afaik, you cannot get an instance unique id (whatever that is) in JavaScript. You could however assign each instance some identifier.
This only works if you are creating the objects.
E.g.
var addIdentityTracker = (function() {
var pad = "0000000000",
id = 1;
function generateId() {
var i = (id++).toString();
return pad.substr(0, 10 - i.length) + i;
}
return function(Constr) {
var new_constr = function() {
this.___uid = generateId();
Constr.apply(this, arguments);
};
new_constr.prototype = Constr.prototype;
new_constr.prototype.toString = function() {
return this.___uid;
};
return new_constr;
};
}());
and then do:
A = addIdentityTracker(A);
var a = new A();

I'd suggest just assigning a unique ID to each object. Javascript doesn't come with a built-in unique ID mechanism, but you can assign a unique ID to any object you want and then use it as such. For example, you could do this:
// getUniqueID is a function that returns a unique ID for any javascript object.
// If no uniqueID is already present on the object, it coins one using a global
// counter and then stores it on the object.
// So that the uniqueID can be combined with other uniqueIDs easily and still
// create a unique union, the uniqueID here is a unique 10 character string.
// There is no randomness in the IDs as they are only required to be unique
// within the page, not random or unique in the universe. The monotomically
// increasing counter guarantees uniqueness within the page.
// Two globals we need for generating the unique ID
var idCntr = 0;
var controlStr = "0000000000"; // 10 digits long
function getUniqueID(o) {
if (!o.uniqueID) {
var base = idCntr++ + ""; // get string version of idCntr
o.uniqueID = controlStr.slice(0, controlStr.length - base.length) + base; // zero pad
}
return(o.uniqueID);
}
var myobj = {};
var a = new A();
var b = new B();
var c = new C();
myobj[getUniqueID(a) + getUniqueID(b) + getUniqueID(c)] = 42;
For you to fetch the same object back in the future, you'd have to combine the objects in the proper order again. If that wasn't easy, then you could make sure and always combine them in numeric order with the lowest numbers first so you always got a consistent order.

Related

How to define new object of variable type of array object?

jQuery has made my life easier but I'm still very beginner to JavaScript. So, may be, I'm asking a very stupid question here:
var t = {
rows: 3,
columns: 5,
getCellCount: function () {
return this.rows * this.columns;
}
};
var tn = t;
tn.rows = 6;
document.write(tn.rows + " , " + t.rows); // returns 6 , 6
I also tried var tn = new t(); // but seems wrong
So, How to retrieve old intrinsic value from object so that it results 6 , 3
tn and t are both pointing to the same object, that's why when you change tn.rows it also changes t.rows. There is no such thing as old intrinsic value.
You must copy the object in order to keep the old value. There are two: shallow copy and deep copy.
Copying the key-value pairs is pretty easy with Object.create.
var newObj = Object.create(oldObj);
Now if you change the values in newObj, it will not change the original one:
var a = {a:1}, b = Object.create(a);
b.a = 2;
console.log(a.a, b.a); //1,2
However, to perform a complete copy is really complicated. See more: How do I correctly clone a JavaScript object?
PS: The new keyword you mentioned is for creating an object as in classes.
function Car(n, y){ //This is called a "constructor"
var name = n, year = y; //Private variables
return {
getName: function(){ return name; }, //Getters
getYear: function(){ return year; }
};
}
var myNewCar = new Car("Toyota", 2010);
myNewCar.getName(); //"Toyota"
myNewCar.getYear(); //2010
(This is also how you create objects in Java, if you have taken those CS courses you would recognize this pattern.)
var tn = t;
simply makes both tn and t to point to the same object in memory. So, change in one object will reflect in other as well. You can clone the object, like this
function copyObject(sourceObject) {
var result = {};
for (var key in sourceObject) {
if (sourceObject.hasOwnProperty(key)) {
result[key] = sourceObject[key];
}
}
return result;
}
var tn = copyObject(t);
You are asking to clone a JSON object.
var tn={};
for (key in t) tn[key]=t[key];
There may be other "prettier" ways, but this guarantees the clone.
The = operator in javascript just changes what the object points to, so it will not create a copy of the original object. You can take a look here to see possible ways to create a clone of the object.
If you want to create a Javascript object, the conventional way is to create a function:
// Use capitalized names for Object-creating functions.
// I guessed that you wanted a matrix of some sort.
function Matrix(rows, columns) {
this.rows = rows;
this.columns = columns;
this.cellCount = function() {
return this.rows * this.columns;
}
this.dimensions = function() {
return this.rows, + ", " + this.columns;
}
this.copy = function() {
return new Matrix(this.rows, this.columns);
}
}
var t = new Matrix(6, 3);
There are more sophisticated ways to do this, using Object.create. Look at Javascript: The Good Parts.

Javascript: Server sided dynamic variable names

How would I create dynamic variable names in NodeJS? Some examples say to store in the window variable, but I was assuming that is client-side Javascript. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Generally you would do something like:
var myVariables = {};
var variableName = 'foo';
myVariables[variableName] = 42;
myVariables.foo // = 42
In node.js there is the global context, which is the equivalent of the window context in client-side js. Declaring a variable outside of any closure/function/module as you would in plain Javascript will make it reside in the global context, that is, as a property of global.
I understand from your question that you want something akin to the following:
var something = 42;
var varname = "something";
console.log(window[varname]);
This in node.js would become:
var something = 42;
var varname = "something";
console.log(global[varname]);
Just don't know what a bad answer gets so many votes. It's quite easy answer but you make it complex.
var type = 'article';
this[type+'_count'] = 1000; // in a function we use "this";
alert(article_count);
One possible solution may be:
Using REST parameter, one can create an array and add each dynamic variable (REST parameter item) as an object to that array.
// function for handling a dynamic list of variables using REST parameters
const dynamicVars = (...theArgs) => {
let tempDynamicVars = [];
// as long as there are arguments, a new object is added to the array dynamicVars, creating a dynamic object list of variables
for (let args = 0; args < theArgs.length; args++){
const vName = `v${args}`;
tempDynamicVars = [...tempDynamicVars, {[vName]: theArgs[args]}]; //using spread operator
// dynamicVars.push({[vName]: theArgs[args]}); // or using push - same output
}
return tempDynamicVars;
}
// short version from above
// const dynamicVars = (...theArgs) => theArgs.map((e, i) => ({[`v${i}`]: e}));
// checking
const first = dynamicVars("F", 321);
console.log("Dynamic variable array:", first);
console.log(` - ${first.length} dynamic variables`);
console.log(" - second variable in the list is:", first[1], "\n");
console.log(dynamicVars("x, y, z"));
console.log(dynamicVars(1, 2, 3));
console.log(dynamicVars("a", "b", "c", "d"));

JavaScript array of pointers like in C++

I'm faced with a situation in JavaScript when I need to update an object via its pointer similar to С++ array of pointers to objects
Example code for my issue:
var foo = new Array();
var bar = function(){
this.test = 1;
foo.push(this); // push an object (or a copy of object?) but not pointer
};
var barInst = new bar(); // create new instance
// foo[0].test equals 1
barInst.test = 2;
// now barInst.test equals 2 but
// foo[0].test still equals 1 but 2 is needed
So, how can I solve this? Should I use a callback or something like this or there is an easy way to help me to avoid copying the object instead pushing the raw pointer into an array?
JS is pass-by-value, so your original assignment was this.test = the value of 1, in my example, it's this.test = the object pointed to by ptr, so when I change ptr this.test changes as well.
var foo = [],
ptr = {val: 1},
bar = function(){
this.test = ptr;
foo.push(this); // push an object (or a copy of object?) but not pointer
},
barInst = new bar(); // create new instance
// foo[0].test.val equals 1
ptr.val = 2;
// foo[0].test.val equals 2
Although if you thought that foo.push(this); was similar, it isn't. Since this is an object, the array will indeed contain "raw pointers" to objects, just like you want. You can prove this simply:
foo[0].test = 3;
// barInst.test === 3
Which shows that it is indeed a pointer to the object that was pushed onto the array
"create object method pointer"
Object.defineProperty(Object.prototype,'pointer',{
value:function(arr, val){
return eval(
"this['"+arr.join("']['")+"']"+
((val!==undefined)?("="+JSON.stringify(val)):"")
);
}
});
ex of use
var o={a:1,b:{b1:2,b2:3},c:[1,2,3]}, arr=['b','b2']
o.pointer(arr) // value 3
o.pointer(['c',0], "new_value" )

Under what circumstances is it necessary to perform an explicit cast of a variable to a string in JavaScript?

Are there any scenarios where it is absolutely necessary to perform an explicit cast of a variable in JavaScript to a String
In the following example it is not necessary:
var n=1;
var s = "Hello" + n;
var s = "Hello"+String(n); //not necessary
I've used a numeric value above, although this need not apply only to numerics.
Yes, if you want "11" instead of 2.
var n = 1;
var s = n + n;
Will be s === 2
Well if your want to display two numbers side by side...
var a=5, b = 10;
alert( a+b ); // yields 15
alert( String(a) + String(b) ); //yields '510'
but i do not know if you would ever want to do something like this..
I would say it is necessary in this situation:
var n = 20;
var m = 10;
var s = String(n) + String(m); // "2010" String
It depends on the type of object you are working with. The basic objects already have a useful toString method that turns them into strings. But custom objects don’t. They will inherit the method from Object.prototype.toString.
So whenever you have a custom object that should return a useful string when converted to string, define a toString method:
function Human(name) {
this.name = name.toString();
this.toString = function() {
return this.name;
};
return this;
}
var alice = new Human("Alice");
alert("Hi, I’m " + alice + ".");
Usually a variable is converted to string when you want to use string methods on that variable. I think that the most useful case is when you must use a string method inside a function and you don't know what type of variable the user passes into the function. For example if you want to calculate the number of characters in a variable:
function length(s)
{
return s.length;
}
With this function you can only work with strings because if the user inserts a number as argument the length property is undefined, because the Number object doesn't have that property, so you must cast the variable:
function length(s)
{
s=s+"";
return s.length;
}
and this time it works.

Javascript: Behavior of {}

I didn't have a understanding on
difference between intializing a
variable with {} and a named-function
with new keyword. I mean which
practice should I use to give a
definition of an object. Which is more
appropiate and for which case?
Then I made a little example to test
both practices. And
I found a very simple difference.
Whenever you intialized an
variable with {}, that variable is
the only reference of this object
definition given in {}. {} itself
doesn't have a name so it can't be
called to intialized with new. Only a
reference is avaliable to get it.
So it seems we can easily implement
singleton pattern on objects using {}.
What I see you can't have more than
one instances with {} not even you can
apply clone if you do you will get
only a reference of that object.
Am I assuming a correct behavior of
{}?
var A = {
B : 0
};
// A is an object?
document.write("A is an " + typeof A);
Lets try to clone object A
var objectOfA = new Object(A);
objectOfA.B = 1;
//Such operation is not allowed!
//var objectOfA = new A();
var referenceOfA = A;
referenceOfA.B = -1;
document.write("A.B: " + A.B);
document.write("<br/>");
The above referenceOfA.B holds a reference of object A, so changing the value of referenceOfA.B surely reflects in A.B.
document.write("referenceOfA.B: " + referenceOfA.B);
document.write("<br/>");
If successfully cloned then objectOfA should hold value 1
document.write("objectOfA.B: " + objectOfA.B);
document.write("<br/>");
Here are the results:
A is an object
A.B: -1
referenceOfA.B: -1
objectOfA.B: -1
This may be of use, excerpt:
CatNames.instance = null; // Will contain the one and only instance of the class
// This function ensures that I always use the same instance of the object
CatNames.getInstance = function() {
if (CatNames.instance == null) {
CatNames.instance = new CatNames();
}
return CatNames.instance;
}
Note: you should not clone singletons.
A is already an object, so new Object(A) just returns A. You can prove this by running
var c = {};
alert(c === new Object(c));
So no cloning is going on.
What are you actually trying to do, and what does the Singleton pattern have to do with this cloning business?
For cloning objects you will have to do a bit more work. Something like below.
var a = {
val:1,
clone : function(){
return {val: a.val, clone : a.clone}
}
};
var b = a.clone();
b.val = 2;
console.log(a);
console.log(b);
Now you can clone an object and change it values. If you want to clone more complex objects, you could write a recursive function for this.
You can use these object literals as either static classes or as objects with key/value pairs.
If you want to use non static classes (sort of), use the following:
var MyClass = new function(){}
MyClass.prototype = {
val : 1
};
var a = new MyClass();
Hope this helps.

Categories

Resources