Reputation: 101
I'm trying to improve my coding practices so I attempted to refactor the following code:
EDIT My question is what is about the best practice for short circuit evaluation https://codeburst.io/javascript-what-is-short-circuit-evaluation-ff22b2f5608c
var idArray = [
{ id: 15 },
{ id: -1 },
{ id: 0 },
{ id: 3 },
{ },
{ id: null },
{ id: NaN },
{ id: 'undefined' }
]
let idFilteredArray0 = []
idArray.forEach(idObj =>{
if(typeof idObj.id === 'number' && !isNaN(idObj.id))
idFilteredArray0.push(idObj.id)
})
// from a forEach loop which returns [ 15, -1, 0, 3, 12.2 ]
let idF0 = idArray.reduce((acc, obj) => {
if((obj.id || obj.id) && !isNaN(obj.id))
acc.push(obj.id)
return acc
},[])
// to reduce which returns [15, -1, 3, 12.2]
I think &&'ing is the issue, but I can't see a different way to exclude the NaN value. I'd settle for getting the 0
back into the result array at this point . Lastly if anyone knows of a good source to learn short circuit evaluation, I'd greatly appreciate it. Thanks.
J.
Upvotes: 1
Views: 71
Reputation: 523
if(obj.id)
will return false
when obj.id
is 0
. You should refactor to something like this to account for zero:
let idF0 = idArray.reduce((acc, obj) => {
if(typeof obj.id === 'number' && !isNaN(obj.id))
acc.push(obj.id)
return acc
},[])
And if you want to eek out some more performance, consider the following solution, which runs in linear time complexity, like .reduce()
, but is much faster than the .reduce()
solution:
let idF0 = [], i = 0, length = idArray.length, id;
for (; i < length; i++) {
id = idArray[i].id;
if (id === 'number' && !isNaN(id)) {
idF0.push(id);
}
}
return idF0;
Upvotes: 0
Reputation: 386654
You could filter and map the items and check the type and id the value is not NaN
.
var idArray = [{ id: 15 }, { id: -1 }, { id: 0 }, { id: 3 }, { id: 12.2 }, {}, { id: null }, { id: NaN }, { id: 'undefined' }],
idFiltered = idArray
.filter(({ id }) => typeof id === 'number' && !isNaN(id))
.map(({ id }) => id);
console.log(idFiltered);
Upvotes: 1