I have two object arrays:
var a = [
{id: 4, name: 'Greg'},
{id: 1, name: 'David'},
{id: 2, name: 'John'},
{id: 3, name: 'Matt'},
]
var b = [
{id: 5, name: 'Mathew', position: '1'},
{id: 6, name: 'Gracia', position: '2'},
{id: 2, name: 'John', position: '2'},
{id: 3, name: 'Matt', position: '2'},
]
I want to do an inner join for these two arrays a
and b
, and create a third array like this (if the position property is not present, then it becomes null):
var result = [{
{id: 4, name: 'Greg', position: null},
{id: 1, name: 'David', position: null},
{id: 5, name: 'Mathew', position: '1'},
{id: 6, name: 'Gracia', position: '2'},
{id: 2, name: 'John', position: '2'},
{id: 3, name: 'Matt', position: '2'},
}]
My approach:
function innerJoinAB(a,b) {
a.forEach(function(obj, index) {
// Search through objects in first loop
b.forEach(function(obj2,i2){
// Find objects in 2nd loop
// if obj1 is present in obj2 then push to result.
});
});
}
But the time complexity is O(N^2)
. How can I do it in O(N)
? My friend told me that we can use reducers and Object.assign
.
I'm not able to figure this out. Please help.
Array.prototype.join() The join() method creates and returns a new string by concatenating all of the elements in an array (or an array-like object), separated by commas or a specified separator string. If the array has only one item, then that item will be returned without using the separator.
You can use either the spread operator [... array1, ... array2] , or a functional way []. concat(array1, array2) to merge 2 or more arrays.
Using the spread operator or the concat() method is the most optimal solution. If you are sure that all inputs to merge are arrays, use spread operator . In case you are unsure, use the concat() method. You can use the push() method to merge arrays when you want to change one of the input arrays to merge.
Approach: For this, we can create two arrays, in which one array contains the array elements that are to be mapped, and the second array stores all the return values of the corresponding function. We can use the JavaScript Array push() method to push the return values of the function in the output array.
I don't know how reduce
would help here, but you could use a Map
to
accomplish the same task in O(n)
:
const a = [
{id: 4, name: 'Greg'},
{id: 1, name: 'David'},
{id: 2, name: 'John'},
{id: 3, name: 'Matt'}];
const b = [
{id: 5, name: 'Mathew', position: '1'},
{id: 6, name: 'Gracia', position: '2'},
{id: 2, name: 'John', position: '2'},
{id: 3, name: 'Matt', position: '2'}];
var m = new Map();
// Insert all entries keyed by ID into the Map, filling in placeholder
// 'position' since the Array 'a' lacks 'position' entirely:
a.forEach(function(x) { x.position = null; m.set(x.id, x); });
// For values in 'b', insert them if missing, otherwise, update existing values:
b.forEach(function(x) {
var existing = m.get(x.id);
if (existing === undefined)
m.set(x.id, x);
else
Object.assign(existing, x);
});
// Extract resulting combined objects from the Map as an Array
var result = Array.from(m.values());
console.log(JSON.stringify(result));
.as-console-wrapper { max-height: 100% !important; top: 0; }
Because Map
accesses and updates are O(1)
(on average - because of hash
collisions and rehashing, it can be longer), this makes O(n+m)
(where n
and m
are the lengths of a
and b
respectively; the naive solution you
gave would be O(n*m)
using the same meaning for n
and m
).
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With