Increase value + 1 within for loop in CoffeeScript? - coffeescript

I tried this:
posts = Posts.find({},
  sort:
    position: 1
).fetch()
for post in posts
i = 1
Posts.update post._id,
$set:
position: i
i++
But all the posts end up with position 1. What I want is 1, 2, 3, 4, etc.
What I'm doing wrong?

You can force i to be evaluated (rather than referenced) at the right time by using do. From the fine manual:
When using a JavaScript loop to generate functions, it's common to insert a closure wrapper in order to ensure that loop variables are closed over, and all the generated functions don't just share the final values. CoffeeScript provides the do keyword, which immediately invokes a passed function, forwarding any arguments.
This is exactly the situation you're facing. You can also let CoffeeScript handle the loop counter by using the for e, i in ... form of for:
for post, i in posts
do (post, i) ->
Posts.update post._id,
$set:
position: i + 1

You can also do:
posts.forEach (post, i) ->
Posts.update post._id,
$set:
position: i + 1

Related

Couldn't understand this SWIFT Fucntion [closed]

Closed. This question needs debugging details. It is not currently accepting answers.
Edit the question to include desired behavior, a specific problem or error, and the shortest code necessary to reproduce the problem. This will help others answer the question.
Closed 3 years ago.
Improve this question
Hope you are doing well. Would anyone please explain this code to me? I am still not getting how we got 120 here. When the parameters were passed to the function, where was it saved? How did it determine max and min before calculating?
Would be really appreciated if anyone could explain it for me please..
You're getting 120 because you're asking the tuple for the sum value twice. The tuple passed back is (min: Int, max: Int, sum: Int). In this case, sum is also index number 2 (min is index zero, max is index one). So in this case statistics.sum == statistics.2
If you want to access min or max you can access them using statistics.min or statistics.max respectively. You can also use statistics.0 or statistics.1 if you prefer (I recommend using the labels though).
Final thought: I would change your initial assignment of max and min inside the function to read as follows:
guard var max = scores.first, var min = scores.first else {
return (0, 0, 0)
}
This will protect against the user accidentally passing an empty array.
You could have also set min and max to 0 ,not to scores[0].
This func is very simple, I think you should read somewhere How functions are working.
For loop is used to go through every element, in your case every element in array scores. In every iteration, variable sum is increased by current element in array. So:
At the beginning of the function : sum = 0
1. iteration: sum = 0 + 5
2. iteration: sum = 5 + 3
3. iteration: sum = 8 + 100
4. iteration: sum = 108 + 3
5. iteration: sum = 111 + 9
For loop ends. Sum = 120.
Score in Scores means like every single element in score. So name Score can be whatever you want to name it. You could have also name it element , x, a or whatever you like.
The function returns a tuple of type (min: Int, max: Int, sum: Int).
max and min are not determined before being calculated. When they're first assigned at the top of the function, they just contain the first element of the passed in scores array. But by the time the loop below finishes, they indeed have the correct minimum and maximum values. Those values are then returned in a tuple matching the return type.

Better way to find sums in a grid in Swift

I have an app with a 6x7 grid that lets the user input values. After each value is obtained the app checks to find if any of the consecutive values create a sum of ten and executes further code (which I have working well for the 4 test cases I've written). So far I've been writing if statements similar to the below:
func findTens() {
if (rowOneColumnOnePlaceHolderValue + rowOneColumnTwoPlaceHolderValue) == 10 {
//code to execute
} else if (rowOneColumnOnePlaceHolderValue + rowOneColumnTwoPlaceHolderValue + rowOneColumnThreePlaceHolderValue) == 10 {
//code to execute
} else if (rowOneColumnOnePlaceHolderValue + rowOneColumnTwoPlaceHolderValue + rowOneColumnThreePlaceHolderValue + rowOneColumnFourPlaceHolderValue) == 10 {
//code to execute
} else if (rowOneColumnOnePlaceHolderValue + rowOneColumnTwoPlaceHolderValue + rowOneColumnThreePlaceHolderValue + rowOneColumnFourPlaceHolderValue + rowOneColumnFivePlaceHolderValue) == 10 {
//code to execute
}
That's not quite halfway through row one, and it will end up being a very large set of if statements (231 if I'm calculating correctly, since a single 7 column row would be 1,2-1,2,3-...-2,3-2,3,4-...-67 so 21 possibilities per row). I think there must be a more concise way of doing it but I've struggled to find something better.
I've thought about using an array of each of the rowXColumnYPlaceHolderValue variables similar to the below:
let rowOnePlaceHolderArray = [rowOneColumnOnePlaceHolderValue, rowOneColumnTwoPlaceHolderValue, rowOneColumnThreePlaceHolderValue, rowOneColumnFourPlaceHolderValue, rowOneColumnFivePlaceHolderValue, rowOneColumnSixPlaceHolderValue, rowOneColumnSevenPlaceHolderValue]
for row in rowOnePlaceHolderArray {
//compare each element of the array here, 126 comparisons
}
But I'm struggling to find a next step to that approach, in addition to the fact that those array elements then apparently because copies and not references to the original array anymore...
I've been lucky enough to find some fairly clever solutions to some of the other issues I've come across for the app, but this one has given me trouble for about a week now so I wanted to ask for help to see what ideas I might be missing. It's possible that there will not be another approach that is significantly better than the 231 if statement approach, which will be ok. Thank you in advance!
Here's an idea (off the top of my head; I have not bothered to optimize). I'll assume that your goal is:
Given an array of Int, find the first consecutive elements that sum to a given Int total.
Your use of "10" as a target total is just a special case of that.
So I'll look for consecutive elements that sum to a given total, and if I find them, I'll return their range within the original array. If I don't find any, I'll return nil.
Here we go:
extension Array where Element == Int {
func rangeOfSum(_ sum: Int) -> Range<Int>? {
newstart:
for start in 0..<count-1 {
let slice = dropFirst(start)
for n in 2...slice.count {
let total = slice.prefix(n).reduce(0,+)
if total == sum {
return start..<(start+n)
}
if total > sum {
continue newstart
}
if n == slice.count && total < sum {
return nil
}
}
}
return nil
}
}
Examples:
[1, 8, 6, 2, 8, 4].rangeOfSum(10) // 3..<5, i.e. 2,8
[1, 8, 1, 2, 8, 4].rangeOfSum(10) // 0..<3, i.e. 1,8,1
[1, 8, 3, 2, 9, 4].rangeOfSum(10) // nil
Okay, so now that we've got that, extracting each possible row or column from the grid (or whatever the purpose of the game is) is left as an exercise for the reader. 🙂

safely remove item while iterating backward in Swift 3

When I want to pass through and remove an item or items from an array (when certain conditions are met), I typically iterate backward in the C-style for-loop and remove the item by index, avoiding the problem of index numbers being changed of the next item to be processed, or the changing size of the list affecting how many times the loop is passed through. But the C for-loop has been removed in Swift 3.
Here is my Swift 2.3 code for the initialization of the loop:
for (var i = allowedItems.count - 1; i > -1; i -= 1)
Here is the monstrosity created by the Swift 3 converter:
for (i in ((-1 + 1)...allowedItems.count - 1).reversed())
This version does not compile however. ("Expected ',' separator" at the "in" operator).
I simplify the "-1 + 1" bit to zero:
for (i in (0...allowedItems.count - 1).reversed())
Now the error is "Expected Sequence expression for for-each loop".
What is the safe and hopefully reasonably elegant way of iterating backward in Swift 3, in which an index or counter variable is made available for use in specifying which item should be removed? This type of logic appears a number of places in my code so I want to make sure to find the best solution.
Thanks.
What is the safe and hopefully reasonably elegant way of iterating backward in Swift 3
The built-in way is:
for i in (0 ..< allowedItems.count).reversed()
The elegant way is:
for i in allowedItems.count >>> 0
(where >>> is the custom operator that I define here).
Use stride:
for i in stride(from: allowedItems.count - 1, through: 0, by: -1) {
}
What is the safe and hopefully reasonably elegant way of iterating
backward in Swift 3, in which an index or counter variable is made
available for use in specifying which item should be removed?
This doesn't answer the technical question, but possibly the underlying XY problem: have you considered simply filtering your array based on the criteria "when certain conditions are met"?
func certainConditionsForKeepingAreMet(_ element: YourElementType) -> Bool { /* ... */ }
allowedItems = allowedItems.filter(certainConditionsForKeepingAreMet)
E.g.
var allowedItems = [1, 3 ,6, 2]
func certainConditionsForKeepingAreMet(_ element: Int) -> Bool { return element < 3 }
allowedItems = allowedItems.filter(certainConditionsForKeepingAreMet)
print(allowedItems) // [1, 2]
If you'd like to remove and use the removed elements (on-the-fly), you could simply pipe the elements that are to be removed to some "use this element" function, in the course of checking the conditions for the elements.
func doSomethingWith(_ element: Int) { print("Removed", element) }
func certainConditionsForKeepingAreMet(_ element: Int) -> Bool {
if element >= 3 {
doSomethingWith(element)
return false
}
return true
}
var allowedItems = [1, 3 ,6, 2]
allowedItems = allowedItems.filter(certainConditionsForKeepingAreMet)
/* Removed 3
Removed 6 */
print(allowedItems) // [1, 2]

Swift: Can someone explain this syntax `numbers.sort { $0 > $1 }` for me?

First of all, this question is not about "what does $0 mean". I learnt in swift document that $0 is like index.
My question is "How numbers.sort { $0 > $1 } can be used to implement a sort function". I searched for this syntax numbers.sort { $0 > $1 } in some other websites, for example this one. It is apparently not the current version. So I still can't understand what the meaning of it.
print(numbers) //[20, 19, 1, 12]
let sortedNumbers = numbers.sort { $0 > $1 }
print(sortedNumbers) //[20, 19, 12, 1]
Can someone explain this simple piece of code above for me? Like how this simple code $0 > $1 implement the sort function, sorting the numbers from big to small.
I know some about index, and this $0 looks like index, but it only has $0 and $1 two indices. So how can it be used into 4 numbers? According to my knowledge in C++ before, I can't understand the principle in this.
Please make your answer as specific as possible. Thank you!
----------------- Below is edited extra part -------------------
I don't know whether stackoverflow would allow me to edit my question like this, but this extra part is too long, so I can't add it in the comment.
#pbodsk #Paul Richter
So the sort() syntax in swift uses quick sort to deal with sort function?
Actually my question is more about "what is the operating principle of sort{$0 > $1}". I know what you mean above, and I think it's similar with what swift 2.1 document says, but your answer is not what I really want to know. Sorry, my English expression is not very good. Let me try another way.
When I learnt C++ before, there are always some documents to explain what a function's operating principle is or how this function (like sort() here) operate in background. Sort() here needs to compare first and second interchange. In C++, it's like
if numbers[1] < numbers[2]{ //just consider this pseudocode
int k;
k = numbers[1];
numbers[1] = numbers[2];
numbers[2] = k;
}
We can see this process is obvious. In swift, it's like
numbers.sort({(val1: Int, val2: Int) -> Bool in
return val1 > val2
})
Where is it compared? And how is it interchanged? Does return val1 > val2 automatically compare and interchange these two values and return them? Just this one syntax implement these all 3 processes? How? This is what I really want to know. Sorry again for my poor English expression.
#the_UB and #moonvader are both right, but I just thought that I would extend the example from #moonvader a bit, just to show you how we end up with $0 > $1
If you look at the example in "The Swift Programming Language" about Closure Expressions you can see that to sort an array you call the sort method which can then take a function as a parameter.
This function must take two parameters and compare them, and then return a boolean.
So if we have this array:
let numbers = [4, 6, 8, 1, 3]
and this method
func sortBackwards(val1: Int, val2: Int) -> Bool {
print("val1: \(val1) - val2: \(val2)" )
return val1 > val2
}
We can sort the elements like so:
numbers.sort(sortBackwards) //gives us [8, 6, 4, 3, 1]
The sort method will use our sortBackwards method on each of the elements in the array and compare them.
Here's the output of the print
val1: 6 - val2: 4
val1: 8 - val2: 4
val1: 8 - val2: 6
val1: 1 - val2: 4
val1: 3 - val2: 1
val1: 3 - val2: 4
OK, let's reduce that.
Instead of defining a function, we can add that directly as a parameter to the sort method like so:
numbers.sort({(val1: Int, val2: Int) -> Bool in
return val1 > val2
})
And we still end up with [8, 6, 4, 3, 1] (how fortunate!)
OK, the next thing we can do is what in "The Swift Programming Language" (the link above) is called "Infering Type From Context". As we call this method on an array of Ints, Swift can figure out that our val1 and val2 parameters must be Ints too, there's no need for us to tell it. So, lets remove the types. That leaves us with:
numbers.sort({val1, val2 in
return val1 > val2
})
And still the same result.
OK, getting there. The next thing we can do is what in the book is called "Implicit Returns from Single-Expression Closures"
As our comparison can be done in one line there's no need for us to use return. So:
numbers.sort({val1, val2 in val1 > val2})
Still gives us [8, 6, 4, 3, 1]
Finally we're getting to what #moonvader used much much less words to explain :-) namely "Shorthand Argument Names"
As it says in the book:
Swift automatically provides shorthand argument names to inline closures, which can be used to refer to the values of the closure’s arguments by the names $0, $1, $2, and so on.
So, in our example, val1 can be replaced by $0 and val2 can be replaced by $1
Which gives us:
numbers.sort({$0 > $1})
And still we get [8, 6, 4, 3, 1]
We can then continue to use a "Trailing Closure", which means that if the last parameter of a function is a closure, we can add that parameter "outside" the function.
So we end up with:
numbers.sort{$0 > $1}
And the outcome is still [8, 6, 4, 3, 1]
Hope that helps to clarify things.
Here is what all need to know: Sort and Sorted.
To be more specific, Sorting can be two type : Ascending and Descending.
Q - So to do sorting, what do we need?
A - We need two variables to hold two variable(I don't know if it is the correct word)
Hence in this case we have two variable $0 and $1. These both are shorthands to represent left and right variable. Both will help to sort.
">" will do descending.
"<" will do ascending.
From developer.apple.com
Shorthand Argument Names
Swift automatically provides shorthand argument names to inline closures, which can be used to refer to the values of the closure’s arguments by the names $0, $1, $2, and so on.
If you use these shorthand argument names within your closure expression, you can omit the closure’s argument list from its definition, and the number and type of the shorthand argument names will be inferred from the expected function type. The in keyword can also be omitted, because the closure expression is made up entirely of its body:
reversed = names.sort( { $0 > $1 } )
Here, $0 and $1 refer to the closure’s first and second String arguments.
The process of sorting a list consists of repeatedly reordering its elements until nothing remains to be reordered. Now there are many sorting algorithms, but they all do this, in different ways. So then how are elements reordered? By comparing two given elements, and deciding which comes first, and swapping them if needed.
We can separate the overall reordering and swapping parts from the comparison part, and write a sort function that will take care of all the repeated reordering stuff, and just require the caller to specify how to compare two elements. If the list consists of numbers, it's almost always the case that the way to compare them is to just take their value. But suppose the list consists of things a little more complicated, like cars. How do you compare two cars? Well, you could compare them by numerically comparing their top speed. Or their gas mileage. Or price.
But the comparison doesn't have to be numerical. We could compare two cars by actually racing them. We could compare two cars by just saying if one is blue and the other isn't, the blue one is ordered first, and if neither or both are blue they are ordered as they already are.
We could come up with all sorts of ways to compare two cars. And the sorting algorithm could then sort a list of cars, without knowing anything about cars, as long as we the caller just tell it how to compare cars - any two given cars. We just have to express that comparison as an expression that returns a boolean, where if it's true, the first car is ordered before the second one, and if it's false, the first car is ordered after the second one.
Returning to numbers, that's what sort { $0 > $1 } means, in Swift's very concise syntax: "Sort, where if the first element is > the second one, order the first one before the second one."
You asked how it can sort four numbers with only two indices. $0 and $1 are not bound to the four specific elements in the list [20, 19, 1, 12], they are bound to any two given numbers that need to be compared, because the sorting algorithm repeately needs to do this.
There are a few things to note. First, the operator > has to be defined for the kinds of elements you are sorting. In the example the elements are numbers, and > is indeed defined. Second, the sort function specifies that the boolean true orders the first one before the second rather than the other way around, so the comparison function follows that specification. Third, the last evaluated expression is taken as the boolean value to be used. Having these two assumptions beforehand allows the comparison function to be written so concisely.
So if we wanted to sort those cars by racing them, we could write it like this:
cars.sort {
winner_of_race_between($0, $1) == $0
// if the first car beats the second, it is sorted ahead
}
Or exclusive blueness:
cars.sort { //not guaranteed to be valid Swift, just consider this pseudocode
if(($0.color != Color.blue) && ($1.color == Color.blue) {
$1
} else if (($0.color == Color.blue) && ($1.color != Color.blue)) {
$0
} else { //leave them in same order
$0
}
}
extension Array {
public func mySorted(by areInIncreasingOrder: (Element, Element) throws -> Bool) rethrows -> [Element] {
var newArray: [Element] = self
if newArray.count <= 1 {
/// nothing to do
} else if newArray.count <= 32 { /// 32 ?? 64
for l in 1..<count {
for r in (0..<l).reversed() {
if try areInIncreasingOrder(newArray[r + 1], newArray[r]) {
(newArray[r + 1], newArray[r]) = (newArray[r], newArray[r + 1])
} else {
break
}
}
}
} else {
/// others sort
}
return newArray
}
}
var array: [Int] = [4, 6, 8, 1, 3]
let a1 = array.sorted {
print("\($0) \($1)")
return $0 > $1
}
print("---------")
let a2 = array.mySorted {
print("\($0) \($1)")
return $0 > $1
}
print("==========")
let a1 = array.sorted {
print("\($0) \($1)")
return $0 < $1
}
print("+++++++")
let a2 = array.mySorted {
print("\($0) \($1)")
return $0 < $1
}

Why does passing an unnamed function as transform to array add one to iteration count in playground in furthest abstractions

I'm in the process of getting comfortable passing unnamed functions as arguments and I am using this to practice with, based off of the examples in the Swift Programming Guide.
So we have an array of Ints:
var numbers: Int[] = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7]
And I apply a transform like so: (7)
func transformNumber(number: Int) -> Int {
let result = number * 3
return result
}
numbers = numbers.map(transformNumber)
Which is equal to: (7)
numbers = numbers.map({(number: Int) -> Int in
let result = number * 3
return result;
})
Which is equal to: (8)
numbers = numbers.map({number in number * 3})
Which is equal to: (8)
numbers = numbers.map({$0 * 3})
Which is equal to: (8)
numbers = numbers.map() {$0 * 3}
As you can see in the following graphic, the iteration count in the playground sidebar shows that in the furthest abstraction of a function declaration, it has an 8 count.
Question
Why is it showing as 8 iterations for the last two examples?
It's not showing 8 iterations, really. It's showing that 8 things executed on that line. There were 7 executions as part of the map function, and an 8th to do the assignment back into the numbers variable.
It looks like this could probably provide more helpful diagnostics. I would highly encourage you to provide feedback via https://bugreport.apple.com.
Slightly rewriting your experiment to use only closures, the call counts still differ by one:
Case 1: Explicitly specifying argument types (visit count is 7)
var f1 = {(number: Int) -> Int in
let result = number * 3
return result
}
numbers.map(f1)
Case 2: Implicit argument types (visit count is 8)
var f2 = {$0 * 3}
numbers.map(f2)
If the (x times) count reported by the REPL does indeed represent a count of visits to that code location, and noting that the count is greater by one in cases where the closure type arguments are not explicitly specified (e.g. f2), my guess is that at least in the playground REPL, the extra visit is to establish actual parameter types and fill that gap in the underlying AST.