Find deeply nested JSON property using lodash

Question

I have a JSON API response with the following structure

[
  {
    title: "top1",
    sections: [
      {
        section_title: "section1",
        content: [
          {
            content_title: "title1",
            content_id: "id1"
          },
          {
            content_title: "title2",
            content_id: "id2"
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        section_title: "section2",
        content: [
          {
            content_title: "title3",
            content_id: "id3"
          },
          {
            content_title: "title4",
            content_id: "id4"
          }
        ]
      }
    ]
  }, {
    title: "top2",
    sections: [...]
  },
  ...
]

I also have a small array of content IDs arr2 = ['id2','id3']. I need to search the data from the API request to find any content_id that is contained in arr2.

I have some working lodash code, but my approach of nested forEach does not seem to be the most efficient approach:

_.forEach(response, function(top) {
  _.forEach(top.sections, function(section) {
    _.forEach(section.content, function(content) {
      _.forEach(arr2, function(id) {
        if(id === content.content_id) {
         // Do stuff
        }
      })
    })
  })
})

How could I improve this code?

Answer 1

After a little thought, I actually can't come up with a more elegant solution using other lodash functions for you. It seems that to set the owned properties for each and every case the forEach is the way to go. The only optimisation I can make is to avoid using lodash simply by using the vanilla javascript forEach Array function, and use find to replace the innermost forEach (might make a slight performance improvement).

response.forEach((topItem) => {
    topItem.sections.forEach((section) => {
        section.content.forEach((content) => {
            if(arr2.find((item) => { return item === content.content_id; })){
                topItem.owned = true; section.owned = true; content.owned = true;
            }
        });
    });
});

I have a personal preference for arrow function syntax also...