Sort objects in array with dynamic nested property keys
I'm trying to sort an array of nested objects. It's working with a static chosen key but I can't figure out how to get it dynamically.
So far I've got this code
sortBy = (isReverse=false) => {
this.setState(prevState => ({
files: prevState.files.sort((a, b) => {
const valueA = (((a || {})['general'] || {})['fileID']) || '';
const valueB = (((b || {})['general'] || {})['fileID']) || '';
if(isReverse) return valueB.localeCompare(valueA);
return valueA.localeCompare(valueB);
})
}));
}
At this point the keys are hardcoded ['general']['orderID'] but I want this part to be dynamic by adding a keys param to the sortBy function:
sortBy = (keys, isReverse=false) => { ...
keys is an array with the nested keys. For the above example, it will be ['general', 'fileID'].
What are the steps that need to be taken to make this dynamic?
Note: child objects can be undefined therefore I'm using a || {}
Note 2: I'm using es6. No external packages.
javascript arrays sorting object ecmascript-6
add a comment |
I'm trying to sort an array of nested objects. It's working with a static chosen key but I can't figure out how to get it dynamically.
So far I've got this code
sortBy = (isReverse=false) => {
this.setState(prevState => ({
files: prevState.files.sort((a, b) => {
const valueA = (((a || {})['general'] || {})['fileID']) || '';
const valueB = (((b || {})['general'] || {})['fileID']) || '';
if(isReverse) return valueB.localeCompare(valueA);
return valueA.localeCompare(valueB);
})
}));
}
At this point the keys are hardcoded ['general']['orderID'] but I want this part to be dynamic by adding a keys param to the sortBy function:
sortBy = (keys, isReverse=false) => { ...
keys is an array with the nested keys. For the above example, it will be ['general', 'fileID'].
What are the steps that need to be taken to make this dynamic?
Note: child objects can be undefined therefore I'm using a || {}
Note 2: I'm using es6. No external packages.
javascript arrays sorting object ecmascript-6
will it contain just two keys or that also can be dynamic
– Shubham Khatri
4 hours ago
Sorry for not mentioning. In my current project it can be up to 4 keys so it has to be dynamic
– Thore
4 hours ago
add a comment |
I'm trying to sort an array of nested objects. It's working with a static chosen key but I can't figure out how to get it dynamically.
So far I've got this code
sortBy = (isReverse=false) => {
this.setState(prevState => ({
files: prevState.files.sort((a, b) => {
const valueA = (((a || {})['general'] || {})['fileID']) || '';
const valueB = (((b || {})['general'] || {})['fileID']) || '';
if(isReverse) return valueB.localeCompare(valueA);
return valueA.localeCompare(valueB);
})
}));
}
At this point the keys are hardcoded ['general']['orderID'] but I want this part to be dynamic by adding a keys param to the sortBy function:
sortBy = (keys, isReverse=false) => { ...
keys is an array with the nested keys. For the above example, it will be ['general', 'fileID'].
What are the steps that need to be taken to make this dynamic?
Note: child objects can be undefined therefore I'm using a || {}
Note 2: I'm using es6. No external packages.
javascript arrays sorting object ecmascript-6
I'm trying to sort an array of nested objects. It's working with a static chosen key but I can't figure out how to get it dynamically.
So far I've got this code
sortBy = (isReverse=false) => {
this.setState(prevState => ({
files: prevState.files.sort((a, b) => {
const valueA = (((a || {})['general'] || {})['fileID']) || '';
const valueB = (((b || {})['general'] || {})['fileID']) || '';
if(isReverse) return valueB.localeCompare(valueA);
return valueA.localeCompare(valueB);
})
}));
}
At this point the keys are hardcoded ['general']['orderID'] but I want this part to be dynamic by adding a keys param to the sortBy function:
sortBy = (keys, isReverse=false) => { ...
keys is an array with the nested keys. For the above example, it will be ['general', 'fileID'].
What are the steps that need to be taken to make this dynamic?
Note: child objects can be undefined therefore I'm using a || {}
Note 2: I'm using es6. No external packages.
javascript arrays sorting object ecmascript-6
javascript arrays sorting object ecmascript-6
asked 4 hours ago
ThoreThore
393113
393113
will it contain just two keys or that also can be dynamic
– Shubham Khatri
4 hours ago
Sorry for not mentioning. In my current project it can be up to 4 keys so it has to be dynamic
– Thore
4 hours ago
add a comment |
will it contain just two keys or that also can be dynamic
– Shubham Khatri
4 hours ago
Sorry for not mentioning. In my current project it can be up to 4 keys so it has to be dynamic
– Thore
4 hours ago
will it contain just two keys or that also can be dynamic
– Shubham Khatri
4 hours ago
will it contain just two keys or that also can be dynamic
– Shubham Khatri
4 hours ago
Sorry for not mentioning. In my current project it can be up to 4 keys so it has to be dynamic
– Thore
4 hours ago
Sorry for not mentioning. In my current project it can be up to 4 keys so it has to be dynamic
– Thore
4 hours ago
add a comment |
7 Answers
7
active
oldest
votes
You can loop ovver the keys to get the values and then compare them like
sortBy = (keys, isReverse=false) => {
this.setState(prevState => ({
files: prevState.files.sort((a, b) => {
const clonedKey = [...keys];
let valueA = a;
let valueB = b
while(clonedKey.length > 0) {
const key = clonedKey.shift();
valueA = (valueA || {})[key];
valueB = (valueB || {})[key];
}
valueA = valueA || '';
valueB = valueB || '';
if(isReverse) return valueB.localeCompare(valueA);
return valueA.localeCompare(valueB);
})
}));
}
@ziggywiggy Thanks for pointing out the error
– Shubham Khatri
3 hours ago
add a comment |
You can use a loop to extract a nested property path from an object:
const obj = {
a: {
b: {
c: 3
}
}
}
const keys = ['a', 'b', 'c']
let value = obj;
for (const key of keys) {
if (!value) break; // stop once we reach a falsy value. Optionally you can make this a tighter check accounting for objects only
value = value[key];
}
console.log(`c=${value}`);Then you can wrap the function above into a helper:
function getPath(obj, keys) {
let value = obj;
for (const key of keys) {
if (!value) break; // stop once we reach a falsy value. Optionally you can make this a tighter check accounting for objects only
value = value[key];
}
return value;
}
And use it when obtaining your values:
sortBy = (isReverse = false, keys = ) => {
this.setState(prevState => ({
files: prevState.files.sort((a, b) => {
const valueA = getPath(a, keys) || '';
const valueB = getPath(b, keys) || '';
// ...
})
}));
}
add a comment |
One way could be using reduce() over the new keys argument, like this:
sortBy = (keys, isReverse=false) => {
this.setState(prevState => ({
files: prevState.files.sort((a, b) => {
const valueA = keys.reduce((acc, key) => (acc || {})[key], a) || '';
const valueA = keys.reduce((acc, key) => (acc || {})[key], b) || '';
if (isReverse) return valueB.localeCompare(valueA);
return valueA.localeCompare(valueB);
})
}));
}
add a comment |
To work with an arbitrary number of keys, you could create a function that could be reused with .reduce() to traverse deeply into nested objects. I'd also put the keys as the last parameter, so that you can use "rest" and "spread" syntax.
const getKey = (o, k) => (o || {})[k];
const sorter = (isReverse, ...keys) => (a, b) => {
const valueA = keys.reduce(getKey, a) || '';
const valueB = keys.reduce(getKey, b) || '';
if (isReverse) return valueB.localeCompare(valueA);
return valueA.localeCompare(valueB);
};
const sortBy = (isReverse = false, ...keys) => {
this.setState(prevState => ({
files: prevState.files.sort(sorter(isReverse, ...keys))
}));
}I also moved the sort function out to its own const variable, and made it return a new function that uses the isReverse value.
add a comment |
Try
let files = [
{ general: { fileID: "3"}},
{ general: { fileID: "1"}},
{ general: { fileID: "2"}},
{ general: { }}
];
function nestedVal(keys,o) {
let obj = o;
keys.forEach(k=> obj = obj[k]||{} );
return obj.localeCompare ? obj : '';
}
function sortBy(keys, arr, isReverse=false) {
arr.sort((a,b) => {
let av = nestedVal(keys,a);
let bv = nestedVal(keys,b);
let v = av.localeCompare(bv);
return isReverse ? -v : v;
})
}
sortBy(['general', 'fileID'], files, true)
console.log(files);add a comment |
This also handles the case when the path resolves to a non-string value by converting it to string. Otherwise .localeCompare might fail.
sortBy = (keys, isReverse=false) => {
this.setState(prevState => ({
files: prevState.files.sort((a, b) => {
const valueA = getValueAtPath(a, keys);
const valueB = getValueAtPath(b, keys);
if(isReverse) return valueB.localeCompare(valueA);
return valueA.localeCompare(valueB);
})
}));
}
function getValueAtPath(file, path) {
let value = file;
let keys = [...path]; // preserve the original path array
while(value && keys.length) {
let key = keys.shift();
value = value[key];
}
return (value || '').toString();
}
add a comment |
In this post, we'll write sortBy as -
sortBy = (comparator = asc) =>
this.setState
( { files:
isort
( contramap
( comparator
, generalFileId
)
, this.state.files
)
}
)
Your question introduces you to two cool functional concepts; we'll use these to answer the question -
- Monads
- Contravariant Functors
Let's not get overwhelmed by terms though and instead focus on gaining an intuition for how things work. At first, it looks like we have a problem checking for nulls. Having to deal with the possibility that some of our inputs may not have the nested properties makes our function messy. If we can generalize this concept of a possible value, we can clean things up a bit.
We'll start by writing a function safeProp that accepts an object and a property string as input. Intuitively, safeProp safely returns the property p of object o -
const { Nothing, fromNullable } =
require ('data.maybe')
const safeProp = (o = {}, p = '') =>
// if o is an object
Object (o) === o
// access property p on object o, wrapping the result in a Maybe
? fromNullable (o[p])
// otherwise o is not an object, return Nothing
: Nothing ()
Instead of simply returning o[p] which could be a null or undefined value, we'll get back a Maybe that guides us in handling the result -
const generalFileId = (o = {}) =>
// access the general property
safeProp (o, 'general')
// if it exists, access the fileId property on the child
.chain (child => safeProp (child, 'fileId'))
// get the result if valid, otherwise return empty string
.getOrElse ('')
Now we have a function which can take objects a varying complexity, and guarantees the result we're interested in -
console .log
( generalFileId ({ general: { fileId: 'a' } }) // 'a'
, generalFileId ({ general: { fileId: 'b' } }) // 'b'
, generalFileId ({ general: 'x' }) // ''
, generalFileId ({ a: 'x '}) // ''
, generalFileId ({ general: { err: 'x' } }) // ''
, generalFileId ({}) // ''
)
That's half the battle right there. We can now go from our complex object to the precise string value we want to use for comparison purposes.
I'm intentionally avoiding showing you an implementation of Maybe here because this in itself is a valuable lesson. When a module promises capability X, we assume we have capability X, and ignore what happens in the black box of the module. The very point of data abstraction is to hide concerns away so the programmer can think about things at a higher level. This applies regardless of whether the module is provided by a third party, such as from npm, or if you wrote the module yourself.
We'll show a basic implementation of Maybe later in the answer, but for now we just have to finish the sort ...
We start with two basic comparators, asc for ascending sort, and desc for descending sort -
const asc = (a, b) =>
a .localeCompare (b)
const desc = (a, b) =>
asc (a, b) * -1
In React, we cannot mutate previous state, instead we must create new state. So to sort, we must implement isort which will not mutate the input object -
const isort = (compare = asc, xs = ) =>
xs
.slice (0) // clone
.sort (compare) // then sort
And of course a and b are sometimes complex objects, so case we can't directly call asc or desc. Below contramap will transform our data before using one function g, before passing the data to the other function, f -
const contramap = (f, g) =>
(a, b) => f (g (a), g (b))
const files =
[ { general: { fileId: 'e' } }
, { general: { fileId: 'b' } }
, { general: { fileId: 'd' } }
, { general: { fileId: 'c' } }
, { general: { fileId: 'a' } }
]
isort
( contramap (asc, generalFileId) // ascending comparator
, files
)
// [ { general: { fileId: 'a' } }
// , { general: { fileId: 'b' } }
// , { general: { fileId: 'c' } }
// , { general: { fileId: 'd' } }
// , { general: { fileId: 'e' } }
// ]
Using the other comparator desc, we can see sorting work in the other direction -
isort
( contramap (desc, generalFileId) // descending comparator
, files
)
// [ { general: { fileId: 'e' } }
// , { general: { fileId: 'd' } }
// , { general: { fileId: 'c' } }
// , { general: { fileId: 'b' } }
// , { general: { fileId: 'a' } }
// ]
Now to write the method for your React component -
sortBy = (reverse = true) =>
this.setState
( { files:
isort
( contramap
( reverse ? desc : asc
, generalFileId
)
, this.state.files
)
}
)
This uses the boolean switch like in your original question, but since React embraces functional pattern, I think it would be even better as a higher-order function -
sortBy = (comparator = asc) =>
this.setState
( { files:
isort
( contramap
( comparator
, generalFileId
)
, this.state.files
)
}
)
If the nested property you need to access is not guaranteed to be general and fileId, we can make a generic function which accepts a list of properties and can lookup a nested property of any depth -
const deepProp = (o = {}, props = ) =>
props .reduce
( (acc, p) => // for each p, safely lookup p on child
acc .chain (child => safeProp (child, p))
, fromNullable (o) // init with Maybe o
)
const generalFileId = (o = {}) =>
deepProp (o, [ 'general', 'fileId' ]) // using deepProp
.getOrElse ('')
const fooBarQux = (o = {}) =>
deepProp (o, [ 'foo', 'bar', 'qux' ]) // any number of nested props
.getOrElse (0) // customizable default
console.log
( generalFileId ({ general: { fileId: 'a' } } ) // 'a'
, generalFileId ({}) // ''
, fooBarQux ({ foo: { bar: { qux: 1 } } } ) // 1
, fooBarQux ({ foo: { bar: 2 } }) // 0
, fooBarQux ({}) // 0
)
Above, we use the data.maybe package which provides us with the capability to work with potential values. The module exports functions to convert ordinary values to a Maybe, and vice versa, as well as many useful operations that are applicable to potential values. There's nothing forcing you to use this particular implementation, however. The concept is simple enough that you could implement fromNullable, Just and Nothing in a couple dozen lines, which we'll see later in this answer -
Run the complete demo below on repl.it
const { Just, Nothing, fromNullable } =
require ('data.maybe')
const safeProp = (o = {}, p = '') =>
Object (o) === o
? fromNullable (o[p])
: Nothing ()
const generalFileId = (o = {}) =>
safeProp (o, 'general')
.chain (child => safeProp (child, 'fileId'))
.getOrElse ('')
// ----------------------------------------------
const asc = (a, b) =>
a .localeCompare (b)
const desc = (a, b) =>
asc (a, b) * -1
const contramap = (f, g) =>
(a, b) => f (g (a), g (b))
const isort = (compare = asc, xs = ) =>
xs
.slice (0)
.sort (compare)
// ----------------------------------------------
const files =
[ { general: { fileId: 'e' } }
, { general: { fileId: 'b' } }
, { general: { fileId: 'd' } }
, { general: { fileId: 'c' } }
, { general: { fileId: 'a' } }
]
isort
( contramap (asc, generalFileId)
, files
)
// [ { general: { fileId: 'a' } }
// , { general: { fileId: 'b' } }
// , { general: { fileId: 'c' } }
// , { general: { fileId: 'd' } }
// , { general: { fileId: 'e' } }
// ]
The advantages to this approach should be evident. Instead of a one big complex function that is difficult to write, read, and test, we've combined several smaller functions that are easier to write, read, and test. The smaller functions have the added advantage of being used in other parts of your program, whereas the big complex function is likely to only be usable in one part.
Lastly, sortBy is implemented as a higher-order function which means we're not limited to only ascending and descending sorts toggled by the reverse boolean; any valid comparator can be used. This means we could even write an even more specialized comparator that handles tie-breaks using custom logic or compares prop1 first, then prop2, etc. Higher-order functions expand your possibilities tremendously.
I don't like making empty promises so I want to show you that it's not difficult to devise your own mechanisms like Maybe. This is also a nice lesson in data abstraction because it shows us how a module has its own set of concerns. The module's exported values are the only way provide access to the module's functionality; all other components of the module are private and free-to-change as the other requirements dictate -
// Maybe.js
const None =
Symbol ()
class Maybe
{ constructor (v)
{ this.value = v }
chain (f)
{ return this.value == None ? this : f (this.value) }
getOrElse (v)
{ return this.value === None ? v : this.value }
}
const Nothing = () =>
new Maybe (None)
const Just = v =>
new Maybe (v)
const fromNullable = v =>
v == null
? Nothing ()
: Just (v)
module.exports =
{ Just, Nothing, fromNullable } // note the class is hidden from the user
Then we would use it in our module. We only have to change the import (require) but everything else just works as-is because the public API of our module matches -
const { Just, Nothing, fromNullable } =
require ('./Maybe') // this time, use our own Maybe
const safeProp = (o = {}, p = '') => // nothing changes here
Object (o) === o
? fromNullable (o[p])
: Nothing ()
const deepProp = (o, props) => // nothing changes here
props .reduce
( (acc, p) =>
acc .chain (child => safeProp (child, p))
, fromNullable (o)
)
// ...
For more intuition on how to use contramap, and perhaps some unexpected surprises, please explore the following related answers -
- multi-sort using contramap
- recursive search using contramap
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
StackExchange.snippets.init();
});
});
}, "code-snippets");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "1"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
var $window = $(window),
onScroll = function(e) {
var $elem = $('.new-login-left'),
docViewTop = $window.scrollTop(),
docViewBottom = docViewTop + $window.height(),
elemTop = $elem.offset().top,
elemBottom = elemTop + $elem.height();
if ((docViewTop elemBottom)) {
StackExchange.using('gps', function() { StackExchange.gps.track('embedded_signup_form.view', { location: 'question_page' }); });
$window.unbind('scroll', onScroll);
}
};
$window.on('scroll', onScroll);
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f54735985%2fsort-objects-in-array-with-dynamic-nested-property-keys%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
7 Answers
7
active
oldest
votes
7 Answers
7
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
You can loop ovver the keys to get the values and then compare them like
sortBy = (keys, isReverse=false) => {
this.setState(prevState => ({
files: prevState.files.sort((a, b) => {
const clonedKey = [...keys];
let valueA = a;
let valueB = b
while(clonedKey.length > 0) {
const key = clonedKey.shift();
valueA = (valueA || {})[key];
valueB = (valueB || {})[key];
}
valueA = valueA || '';
valueB = valueB || '';
if(isReverse) return valueB.localeCompare(valueA);
return valueA.localeCompare(valueB);
})
}));
}
@ziggywiggy Thanks for pointing out the error
– Shubham Khatri
3 hours ago
add a comment |
You can loop ovver the keys to get the values and then compare them like
sortBy = (keys, isReverse=false) => {
this.setState(prevState => ({
files: prevState.files.sort((a, b) => {
const clonedKey = [...keys];
let valueA = a;
let valueB = b
while(clonedKey.length > 0) {
const key = clonedKey.shift();
valueA = (valueA || {})[key];
valueB = (valueB || {})[key];
}
valueA = valueA || '';
valueB = valueB || '';
if(isReverse) return valueB.localeCompare(valueA);
return valueA.localeCompare(valueB);
})
}));
}
@ziggywiggy Thanks for pointing out the error
– Shubham Khatri
3 hours ago
add a comment |
You can loop ovver the keys to get the values and then compare them like
sortBy = (keys, isReverse=false) => {
this.setState(prevState => ({
files: prevState.files.sort((a, b) => {
const clonedKey = [...keys];
let valueA = a;
let valueB = b
while(clonedKey.length > 0) {
const key = clonedKey.shift();
valueA = (valueA || {})[key];
valueB = (valueB || {})[key];
}
valueA = valueA || '';
valueB = valueB || '';
if(isReverse) return valueB.localeCompare(valueA);
return valueA.localeCompare(valueB);
})
}));
}
You can loop ovver the keys to get the values and then compare them like
sortBy = (keys, isReverse=false) => {
this.setState(prevState => ({
files: prevState.files.sort((a, b) => {
const clonedKey = [...keys];
let valueA = a;
let valueB = b
while(clonedKey.length > 0) {
const key = clonedKey.shift();
valueA = (valueA || {})[key];
valueB = (valueB || {})[key];
}
valueA = valueA || '';
valueB = valueB || '';
if(isReverse) return valueB.localeCompare(valueA);
return valueA.localeCompare(valueB);
})
}));
}
edited 3 hours ago
answered 4 hours ago
Shubham KhatriShubham Khatri
85.3k15103143
85.3k15103143
@ziggywiggy Thanks for pointing out the error
– Shubham Khatri
3 hours ago
add a comment |
@ziggywiggy Thanks for pointing out the error
– Shubham Khatri
3 hours ago
@ziggywiggy Thanks for pointing out the error
– Shubham Khatri
3 hours ago
@ziggywiggy Thanks for pointing out the error
– Shubham Khatri
3 hours ago
add a comment |
You can use a loop to extract a nested property path from an object:
const obj = {
a: {
b: {
c: 3
}
}
}
const keys = ['a', 'b', 'c']
let value = obj;
for (const key of keys) {
if (!value) break; // stop once we reach a falsy value. Optionally you can make this a tighter check accounting for objects only
value = value[key];
}
console.log(`c=${value}`);Then you can wrap the function above into a helper:
function getPath(obj, keys) {
let value = obj;
for (const key of keys) {
if (!value) break; // stop once we reach a falsy value. Optionally you can make this a tighter check accounting for objects only
value = value[key];
}
return value;
}
And use it when obtaining your values:
sortBy = (isReverse = false, keys = ) => {
this.setState(prevState => ({
files: prevState.files.sort((a, b) => {
const valueA = getPath(a, keys) || '';
const valueB = getPath(b, keys) || '';
// ...
})
}));
}
add a comment |
You can use a loop to extract a nested property path from an object:
const obj = {
a: {
b: {
c: 3
}
}
}
const keys = ['a', 'b', 'c']
let value = obj;
for (const key of keys) {
if (!value) break; // stop once we reach a falsy value. Optionally you can make this a tighter check accounting for objects only
value = value[key];
}
console.log(`c=${value}`);Then you can wrap the function above into a helper:
function getPath(obj, keys) {
let value = obj;
for (const key of keys) {
if (!value) break; // stop once we reach a falsy value. Optionally you can make this a tighter check accounting for objects only
value = value[key];
}
return value;
}
And use it when obtaining your values:
sortBy = (isReverse = false, keys = ) => {
this.setState(prevState => ({
files: prevState.files.sort((a, b) => {
const valueA = getPath(a, keys) || '';
const valueB = getPath(b, keys) || '';
// ...
})
}));
}
add a comment |
You can use a loop to extract a nested property path from an object:
const obj = {
a: {
b: {
c: 3
}
}
}
const keys = ['a', 'b', 'c']
let value = obj;
for (const key of keys) {
if (!value) break; // stop once we reach a falsy value. Optionally you can make this a tighter check accounting for objects only
value = value[key];
}
console.log(`c=${value}`);Then you can wrap the function above into a helper:
function getPath(obj, keys) {
let value = obj;
for (const key of keys) {
if (!value) break; // stop once we reach a falsy value. Optionally you can make this a tighter check accounting for objects only
value = value[key];
}
return value;
}
And use it when obtaining your values:
sortBy = (isReverse = false, keys = ) => {
this.setState(prevState => ({
files: prevState.files.sort((a, b) => {
const valueA = getPath(a, keys) || '';
const valueB = getPath(b, keys) || '';
// ...
})
}));
}
You can use a loop to extract a nested property path from an object:
const obj = {
a: {
b: {
c: 3
}
}
}
const keys = ['a', 'b', 'c']
let value = obj;
for (const key of keys) {
if (!value) break; // stop once we reach a falsy value. Optionally you can make this a tighter check accounting for objects only
value = value[key];
}
console.log(`c=${value}`);Then you can wrap the function above into a helper:
function getPath(obj, keys) {
let value = obj;
for (const key of keys) {
if (!value) break; // stop once we reach a falsy value. Optionally you can make this a tighter check accounting for objects only
value = value[key];
}
return value;
}
And use it when obtaining your values:
sortBy = (isReverse = false, keys = ) => {
this.setState(prevState => ({
files: prevState.files.sort((a, b) => {
const valueA = getPath(a, keys) || '';
const valueB = getPath(b, keys) || '';
// ...
})
}));
}
const obj = {
a: {
b: {
c: 3
}
}
}
const keys = ['a', 'b', 'c']
let value = obj;
for (const key of keys) {
if (!value) break; // stop once we reach a falsy value. Optionally you can make this a tighter check accounting for objects only
value = value[key];
}
console.log(`c=${value}`);const obj = {
a: {
b: {
c: 3
}
}
}
const keys = ['a', 'b', 'c']
let value = obj;
for (const key of keys) {
if (!value) break; // stop once we reach a falsy value. Optionally you can make this a tighter check accounting for objects only
value = value[key];
}
console.log(`c=${value}`);answered 4 hours ago
nem035nem035
25.2k54062
25.2k54062
add a comment |
add a comment |
One way could be using reduce() over the new keys argument, like this:
sortBy = (keys, isReverse=false) => {
this.setState(prevState => ({
files: prevState.files.sort((a, b) => {
const valueA = keys.reduce((acc, key) => (acc || {})[key], a) || '';
const valueA = keys.reduce((acc, key) => (acc || {})[key], b) || '';
if (isReverse) return valueB.localeCompare(valueA);
return valueA.localeCompare(valueB);
})
}));
}
add a comment |
One way could be using reduce() over the new keys argument, like this:
sortBy = (keys, isReverse=false) => {
this.setState(prevState => ({
files: prevState.files.sort((a, b) => {
const valueA = keys.reduce((acc, key) => (acc || {})[key], a) || '';
const valueA = keys.reduce((acc, key) => (acc || {})[key], b) || '';
if (isReverse) return valueB.localeCompare(valueA);
return valueA.localeCompare(valueB);
})
}));
}
add a comment |
One way could be using reduce() over the new keys argument, like this:
sortBy = (keys, isReverse=false) => {
this.setState(prevState => ({
files: prevState.files.sort((a, b) => {
const valueA = keys.reduce((acc, key) => (acc || {})[key], a) || '';
const valueA = keys.reduce((acc, key) => (acc || {})[key], b) || '';
if (isReverse) return valueB.localeCompare(valueA);
return valueA.localeCompare(valueB);
})
}));
}
One way could be using reduce() over the new keys argument, like this:
sortBy = (keys, isReverse=false) => {
this.setState(prevState => ({
files: prevState.files.sort((a, b) => {
const valueA = keys.reduce((acc, key) => (acc || {})[key], a) || '';
const valueA = keys.reduce((acc, key) => (acc || {})[key], b) || '';
if (isReverse) return valueB.localeCompare(valueA);
return valueA.localeCompare(valueB);
})
}));
}
answered 4 hours ago
ShiderszShidersz
7,2972831
7,2972831
add a comment |
add a comment |
To work with an arbitrary number of keys, you could create a function that could be reused with .reduce() to traverse deeply into nested objects. I'd also put the keys as the last parameter, so that you can use "rest" and "spread" syntax.
const getKey = (o, k) => (o || {})[k];
const sorter = (isReverse, ...keys) => (a, b) => {
const valueA = keys.reduce(getKey, a) || '';
const valueB = keys.reduce(getKey, b) || '';
if (isReverse) return valueB.localeCompare(valueA);
return valueA.localeCompare(valueB);
};
const sortBy = (isReverse = false, ...keys) => {
this.setState(prevState => ({
files: prevState.files.sort(sorter(isReverse, ...keys))
}));
}I also moved the sort function out to its own const variable, and made it return a new function that uses the isReverse value.
add a comment |
To work with an arbitrary number of keys, you could create a function that could be reused with .reduce() to traverse deeply into nested objects. I'd also put the keys as the last parameter, so that you can use "rest" and "spread" syntax.
const getKey = (o, k) => (o || {})[k];
const sorter = (isReverse, ...keys) => (a, b) => {
const valueA = keys.reduce(getKey, a) || '';
const valueB = keys.reduce(getKey, b) || '';
if (isReverse) return valueB.localeCompare(valueA);
return valueA.localeCompare(valueB);
};
const sortBy = (isReverse = false, ...keys) => {
this.setState(prevState => ({
files: prevState.files.sort(sorter(isReverse, ...keys))
}));
}I also moved the sort function out to its own const variable, and made it return a new function that uses the isReverse value.
add a comment |
To work with an arbitrary number of keys, you could create a function that could be reused with .reduce() to traverse deeply into nested objects. I'd also put the keys as the last parameter, so that you can use "rest" and "spread" syntax.
const getKey = (o, k) => (o || {})[k];
const sorter = (isReverse, ...keys) => (a, b) => {
const valueA = keys.reduce(getKey, a) || '';
const valueB = keys.reduce(getKey, b) || '';
if (isReverse) return valueB.localeCompare(valueA);
return valueA.localeCompare(valueB);
};
const sortBy = (isReverse = false, ...keys) => {
this.setState(prevState => ({
files: prevState.files.sort(sorter(isReverse, ...keys))
}));
}I also moved the sort function out to its own const variable, and made it return a new function that uses the isReverse value.
To work with an arbitrary number of keys, you could create a function that could be reused with .reduce() to traverse deeply into nested objects. I'd also put the keys as the last parameter, so that you can use "rest" and "spread" syntax.
const getKey = (o, k) => (o || {})[k];
const sorter = (isReverse, ...keys) => (a, b) => {
const valueA = keys.reduce(getKey, a) || '';
const valueB = keys.reduce(getKey, b) || '';
if (isReverse) return valueB.localeCompare(valueA);
return valueA.localeCompare(valueB);
};
const sortBy = (isReverse = false, ...keys) => {
this.setState(prevState => ({
files: prevState.files.sort(sorter(isReverse, ...keys))
}));
}I also moved the sort function out to its own const variable, and made it return a new function that uses the isReverse value.
const getKey = (o, k) => (o || {})[k];
const sorter = (isReverse, ...keys) => (a, b) => {
const valueA = keys.reduce(getKey, a) || '';
const valueB = keys.reduce(getKey, b) || '';
if (isReverse) return valueB.localeCompare(valueA);
return valueA.localeCompare(valueB);
};
const sortBy = (isReverse = false, ...keys) => {
this.setState(prevState => ({
files: prevState.files.sort(sorter(isReverse, ...keys))
}));
}const getKey = (o, k) => (o || {})[k];
const sorter = (isReverse, ...keys) => (a, b) => {
const valueA = keys.reduce(getKey, a) || '';
const valueB = keys.reduce(getKey, b) || '';
if (isReverse) return valueB.localeCompare(valueA);
return valueA.localeCompare(valueB);
};
const sortBy = (isReverse = false, ...keys) => {
this.setState(prevState => ({
files: prevState.files.sort(sorter(isReverse, ...keys))
}));
}edited 3 hours ago
answered 4 hours ago
ziggy wiggyziggy wiggy
762
762
add a comment |
add a comment |
Try
let files = [
{ general: { fileID: "3"}},
{ general: { fileID: "1"}},
{ general: { fileID: "2"}},
{ general: { }}
];
function nestedVal(keys,o) {
let obj = o;
keys.forEach(k=> obj = obj[k]||{} );
return obj.localeCompare ? obj : '';
}
function sortBy(keys, arr, isReverse=false) {
arr.sort((a,b) => {
let av = nestedVal(keys,a);
let bv = nestedVal(keys,b);
let v = av.localeCompare(bv);
return isReverse ? -v : v;
})
}
sortBy(['general', 'fileID'], files, true)
console.log(files);add a comment |
Try
let files = [
{ general: { fileID: "3"}},
{ general: { fileID: "1"}},
{ general: { fileID: "2"}},
{ general: { }}
];
function nestedVal(keys,o) {
let obj = o;
keys.forEach(k=> obj = obj[k]||{} );
return obj.localeCompare ? obj : '';
}
function sortBy(keys, arr, isReverse=false) {
arr.sort((a,b) => {
let av = nestedVal(keys,a);
let bv = nestedVal(keys,b);
let v = av.localeCompare(bv);
return isReverse ? -v : v;
})
}
sortBy(['general', 'fileID'], files, true)
console.log(files);add a comment |
Try
let files = [
{ general: { fileID: "3"}},
{ general: { fileID: "1"}},
{ general: { fileID: "2"}},
{ general: { }}
];
function nestedVal(keys,o) {
let obj = o;
keys.forEach(k=> obj = obj[k]||{} );
return obj.localeCompare ? obj : '';
}
function sortBy(keys, arr, isReverse=false) {
arr.sort((a,b) => {
let av = nestedVal(keys,a);
let bv = nestedVal(keys,b);
let v = av.localeCompare(bv);
return isReverse ? -v : v;
})
}
sortBy(['general', 'fileID'], files, true)
console.log(files);Try
let files = [
{ general: { fileID: "3"}},
{ general: { fileID: "1"}},
{ general: { fileID: "2"}},
{ general: { }}
];
function nestedVal(keys,o) {
let obj = o;
keys.forEach(k=> obj = obj[k]||{} );
return obj.localeCompare ? obj : '';
}
function sortBy(keys, arr, isReverse=false) {
arr.sort((a,b) => {
let av = nestedVal(keys,a);
let bv = nestedVal(keys,b);
let v = av.localeCompare(bv);
return isReverse ? -v : v;
})
}
sortBy(['general', 'fileID'], files, true)
console.log(files);let files = [
{ general: { fileID: "3"}},
{ general: { fileID: "1"}},
{ general: { fileID: "2"}},
{ general: { }}
];
function nestedVal(keys,o) {
let obj = o;
keys.forEach(k=> obj = obj[k]||{} );
return obj.localeCompare ? obj : '';
}
function sortBy(keys, arr, isReverse=false) {
arr.sort((a,b) => {
let av = nestedVal(keys,a);
let bv = nestedVal(keys,b);
let v = av.localeCompare(bv);
return isReverse ? -v : v;
})
}
sortBy(['general', 'fileID'], files, true)
console.log(files);let files = [
{ general: { fileID: "3"}},
{ general: { fileID: "1"}},
{ general: { fileID: "2"}},
{ general: { }}
];
function nestedVal(keys,o) {
let obj = o;
keys.forEach(k=> obj = obj[k]||{} );
return obj.localeCompare ? obj : '';
}
function sortBy(keys, arr, isReverse=false) {
arr.sort((a,b) => {
let av = nestedVal(keys,a);
let bv = nestedVal(keys,b);
let v = av.localeCompare(bv);
return isReverse ? -v : v;
})
}
sortBy(['general', 'fileID'], files, true)
console.log(files);edited 3 hours ago
answered 4 hours ago
Kamil KiełczewskiKamil Kiełczewski
11.3k86694
11.3k86694
add a comment |
add a comment |
This also handles the case when the path resolves to a non-string value by converting it to string. Otherwise .localeCompare might fail.
sortBy = (keys, isReverse=false) => {
this.setState(prevState => ({
files: prevState.files.sort((a, b) => {
const valueA = getValueAtPath(a, keys);
const valueB = getValueAtPath(b, keys);
if(isReverse) return valueB.localeCompare(valueA);
return valueA.localeCompare(valueB);
})
}));
}
function getValueAtPath(file, path) {
let value = file;
let keys = [...path]; // preserve the original path array
while(value && keys.length) {
let key = keys.shift();
value = value[key];
}
return (value || '').toString();
}
add a comment |
This also handles the case when the path resolves to a non-string value by converting it to string. Otherwise .localeCompare might fail.
sortBy = (keys, isReverse=false) => {
this.setState(prevState => ({
files: prevState.files.sort((a, b) => {
const valueA = getValueAtPath(a, keys);
const valueB = getValueAtPath(b, keys);
if(isReverse) return valueB.localeCompare(valueA);
return valueA.localeCompare(valueB);
})
}));
}
function getValueAtPath(file, path) {
let value = file;
let keys = [...path]; // preserve the original path array
while(value && keys.length) {
let key = keys.shift();
value = value[key];
}
return (value || '').toString();
}
add a comment |
This also handles the case when the path resolves to a non-string value by converting it to string. Otherwise .localeCompare might fail.
sortBy = (keys, isReverse=false) => {
this.setState(prevState => ({
files: prevState.files.sort((a, b) => {
const valueA = getValueAtPath(a, keys);
const valueB = getValueAtPath(b, keys);
if(isReverse) return valueB.localeCompare(valueA);
return valueA.localeCompare(valueB);
})
}));
}
function getValueAtPath(file, path) {
let value = file;
let keys = [...path]; // preserve the original path array
while(value && keys.length) {
let key = keys.shift();
value = value[key];
}
return (value || '').toString();
}
This also handles the case when the path resolves to a non-string value by converting it to string. Otherwise .localeCompare might fail.
sortBy = (keys, isReverse=false) => {
this.setState(prevState => ({
files: prevState.files.sort((a, b) => {
const valueA = getValueAtPath(a, keys);
const valueB = getValueAtPath(b, keys);
if(isReverse) return valueB.localeCompare(valueA);
return valueA.localeCompare(valueB);
})
}));
}
function getValueAtPath(file, path) {
let value = file;
let keys = [...path]; // preserve the original path array
while(value && keys.length) {
let key = keys.shift();
value = value[key];
}
return (value || '').toString();
}
edited 3 hours ago
answered 3 hours ago
abadalyanabadalyan
39128
39128
add a comment |
add a comment |
In this post, we'll write sortBy as -
sortBy = (comparator = asc) =>
this.setState
( { files:
isort
( contramap
( comparator
, generalFileId
)
, this.state.files
)
}
)
Your question introduces you to two cool functional concepts; we'll use these to answer the question -
- Monads
- Contravariant Functors
Let's not get overwhelmed by terms though and instead focus on gaining an intuition for how things work. At first, it looks like we have a problem checking for nulls. Having to deal with the possibility that some of our inputs may not have the nested properties makes our function messy. If we can generalize this concept of a possible value, we can clean things up a bit.
We'll start by writing a function safeProp that accepts an object and a property string as input. Intuitively, safeProp safely returns the property p of object o -
const { Nothing, fromNullable } =
require ('data.maybe')
const safeProp = (o = {}, p = '') =>
// if o is an object
Object (o) === o
// access property p on object o, wrapping the result in a Maybe
? fromNullable (o[p])
// otherwise o is not an object, return Nothing
: Nothing ()
Instead of simply returning o[p] which could be a null or undefined value, we'll get back a Maybe that guides us in handling the result -
const generalFileId = (o = {}) =>
// access the general property
safeProp (o, 'general')
// if it exists, access the fileId property on the child
.chain (child => safeProp (child, 'fileId'))
// get the result if valid, otherwise return empty string
.getOrElse ('')
Now we have a function which can take objects a varying complexity, and guarantees the result we're interested in -
console .log
( generalFileId ({ general: { fileId: 'a' } }) // 'a'
, generalFileId ({ general: { fileId: 'b' } }) // 'b'
, generalFileId ({ general: 'x' }) // ''
, generalFileId ({ a: 'x '}) // ''
, generalFileId ({ general: { err: 'x' } }) // ''
, generalFileId ({}) // ''
)
That's half the battle right there. We can now go from our complex object to the precise string value we want to use for comparison purposes.
I'm intentionally avoiding showing you an implementation of Maybe here because this in itself is a valuable lesson. When a module promises capability X, we assume we have capability X, and ignore what happens in the black box of the module. The very point of data abstraction is to hide concerns away so the programmer can think about things at a higher level. This applies regardless of whether the module is provided by a third party, such as from npm, or if you wrote the module yourself.
We'll show a basic implementation of Maybe later in the answer, but for now we just have to finish the sort ...
We start with two basic comparators, asc for ascending sort, and desc for descending sort -
const asc = (a, b) =>
a .localeCompare (b)
const desc = (a, b) =>
asc (a, b) * -1
In React, we cannot mutate previous state, instead we must create new state. So to sort, we must implement isort which will not mutate the input object -
const isort = (compare = asc, xs = ) =>
xs
.slice (0) // clone
.sort (compare) // then sort
And of course a and b are sometimes complex objects, so case we can't directly call asc or desc. Below contramap will transform our data before using one function g, before passing the data to the other function, f -
const contramap = (f, g) =>
(a, b) => f (g (a), g (b))
const files =
[ { general: { fileId: 'e' } }
, { general: { fileId: 'b' } }
, { general: { fileId: 'd' } }
, { general: { fileId: 'c' } }
, { general: { fileId: 'a' } }
]
isort
( contramap (asc, generalFileId) // ascending comparator
, files
)
// [ { general: { fileId: 'a' } }
// , { general: { fileId: 'b' } }
// , { general: { fileId: 'c' } }
// , { general: { fileId: 'd' } }
// , { general: { fileId: 'e' } }
// ]
Using the other comparator desc, we can see sorting work in the other direction -
isort
( contramap (desc, generalFileId) // descending comparator
, files
)
// [ { general: { fileId: 'e' } }
// , { general: { fileId: 'd' } }
// , { general: { fileId: 'c' } }
// , { general: { fileId: 'b' } }
// , { general: { fileId: 'a' } }
// ]
Now to write the method for your React component -
sortBy = (reverse = true) =>
this.setState
( { files:
isort
( contramap
( reverse ? desc : asc
, generalFileId
)
, this.state.files
)
}
)
This uses the boolean switch like in your original question, but since React embraces functional pattern, I think it would be even better as a higher-order function -
sortBy = (comparator = asc) =>
this.setState
( { files:
isort
( contramap
( comparator
, generalFileId
)
, this.state.files
)
}
)
If the nested property you need to access is not guaranteed to be general and fileId, we can make a generic function which accepts a list of properties and can lookup a nested property of any depth -
const deepProp = (o = {}, props = ) =>
props .reduce
( (acc, p) => // for each p, safely lookup p on child
acc .chain (child => safeProp (child, p))
, fromNullable (o) // init with Maybe o
)
const generalFileId = (o = {}) =>
deepProp (o, [ 'general', 'fileId' ]) // using deepProp
.getOrElse ('')
const fooBarQux = (o = {}) =>
deepProp (o, [ 'foo', 'bar', 'qux' ]) // any number of nested props
.getOrElse (0) // customizable default
console.log
( generalFileId ({ general: { fileId: 'a' } } ) // 'a'
, generalFileId ({}) // ''
, fooBarQux ({ foo: { bar: { qux: 1 } } } ) // 1
, fooBarQux ({ foo: { bar: 2 } }) // 0
, fooBarQux ({}) // 0
)
Above, we use the data.maybe package which provides us with the capability to work with potential values. The module exports functions to convert ordinary values to a Maybe, and vice versa, as well as many useful operations that are applicable to potential values. There's nothing forcing you to use this particular implementation, however. The concept is simple enough that you could implement fromNullable, Just and Nothing in a couple dozen lines, which we'll see later in this answer -
Run the complete demo below on repl.it
const { Just, Nothing, fromNullable } =
require ('data.maybe')
const safeProp = (o = {}, p = '') =>
Object (o) === o
? fromNullable (o[p])
: Nothing ()
const generalFileId = (o = {}) =>
safeProp (o, 'general')
.chain (child => safeProp (child, 'fileId'))
.getOrElse ('')
// ----------------------------------------------
const asc = (a, b) =>
a .localeCompare (b)
const desc = (a, b) =>
asc (a, b) * -1
const contramap = (f, g) =>
(a, b) => f (g (a), g (b))
const isort = (compare = asc, xs = ) =>
xs
.slice (0)
.sort (compare)
// ----------------------------------------------
const files =
[ { general: { fileId: 'e' } }
, { general: { fileId: 'b' } }
, { general: { fileId: 'd' } }
, { general: { fileId: 'c' } }
, { general: { fileId: 'a' } }
]
isort
( contramap (asc, generalFileId)
, files
)
// [ { general: { fileId: 'a' } }
// , { general: { fileId: 'b' } }
// , { general: { fileId: 'c' } }
// , { general: { fileId: 'd' } }
// , { general: { fileId: 'e' } }
// ]
The advantages to this approach should be evident. Instead of a one big complex function that is difficult to write, read, and test, we've combined several smaller functions that are easier to write, read, and test. The smaller functions have the added advantage of being used in other parts of your program, whereas the big complex function is likely to only be usable in one part.
Lastly, sortBy is implemented as a higher-order function which means we're not limited to only ascending and descending sorts toggled by the reverse boolean; any valid comparator can be used. This means we could even write an even more specialized comparator that handles tie-breaks using custom logic or compares prop1 first, then prop2, etc. Higher-order functions expand your possibilities tremendously.
I don't like making empty promises so I want to show you that it's not difficult to devise your own mechanisms like Maybe. This is also a nice lesson in data abstraction because it shows us how a module has its own set of concerns. The module's exported values are the only way provide access to the module's functionality; all other components of the module are private and free-to-change as the other requirements dictate -
// Maybe.js
const None =
Symbol ()
class Maybe
{ constructor (v)
{ this.value = v }
chain (f)
{ return this.value == None ? this : f (this.value) }
getOrElse (v)
{ return this.value === None ? v : this.value }
}
const Nothing = () =>
new Maybe (None)
const Just = v =>
new Maybe (v)
const fromNullable = v =>
v == null
? Nothing ()
: Just (v)
module.exports =
{ Just, Nothing, fromNullable } // note the class is hidden from the user
Then we would use it in our module. We only have to change the import (require) but everything else just works as-is because the public API of our module matches -
const { Just, Nothing, fromNullable } =
require ('./Maybe') // this time, use our own Maybe
const safeProp = (o = {}, p = '') => // nothing changes here
Object (o) === o
? fromNullable (o[p])
: Nothing ()
const deepProp = (o, props) => // nothing changes here
props .reduce
( (acc, p) =>
acc .chain (child => safeProp (child, p))
, fromNullable (o)
)
// ...
For more intuition on how to use contramap, and perhaps some unexpected surprises, please explore the following related answers -
- multi-sort using contramap
- recursive search using contramap
add a comment |
In this post, we'll write sortBy as -
sortBy = (comparator = asc) =>
this.setState
( { files:
isort
( contramap
( comparator
, generalFileId
)
, this.state.files
)
}
)
Your question introduces you to two cool functional concepts; we'll use these to answer the question -
- Monads
- Contravariant Functors
Let's not get overwhelmed by terms though and instead focus on gaining an intuition for how things work. At first, it looks like we have a problem checking for nulls. Having to deal with the possibility that some of our inputs may not have the nested properties makes our function messy. If we can generalize this concept of a possible value, we can clean things up a bit.
We'll start by writing a function safeProp that accepts an object and a property string as input. Intuitively, safeProp safely returns the property p of object o -
const { Nothing, fromNullable } =
require ('data.maybe')
const safeProp = (o = {}, p = '') =>
// if o is an object
Object (o) === o
// access property p on object o, wrapping the result in a Maybe
? fromNullable (o[p])
// otherwise o is not an object, return Nothing
: Nothing ()
Instead of simply returning o[p] which could be a null or undefined value, we'll get back a Maybe that guides us in handling the result -
const generalFileId = (o = {}) =>
// access the general property
safeProp (o, 'general')
// if it exists, access the fileId property on the child
.chain (child => safeProp (child, 'fileId'))
// get the result if valid, otherwise return empty string
.getOrElse ('')
Now we have a function which can take objects a varying complexity, and guarantees the result we're interested in -
console .log
( generalFileId ({ general: { fileId: 'a' } }) // 'a'
, generalFileId ({ general: { fileId: 'b' } }) // 'b'
, generalFileId ({ general: 'x' }) // ''
, generalFileId ({ a: 'x '}) // ''
, generalFileId ({ general: { err: 'x' } }) // ''
, generalFileId ({}) // ''
)
That's half the battle right there. We can now go from our complex object to the precise string value we want to use for comparison purposes.
I'm intentionally avoiding showing you an implementation of Maybe here because this in itself is a valuable lesson. When a module promises capability X, we assume we have capability X, and ignore what happens in the black box of the module. The very point of data abstraction is to hide concerns away so the programmer can think about things at a higher level. This applies regardless of whether the module is provided by a third party, such as from npm, or if you wrote the module yourself.
We'll show a basic implementation of Maybe later in the answer, but for now we just have to finish the sort ...
We start with two basic comparators, asc for ascending sort, and desc for descending sort -
const asc = (a, b) =>
a .localeCompare (b)
const desc = (a, b) =>
asc (a, b) * -1
In React, we cannot mutate previous state, instead we must create new state. So to sort, we must implement isort which will not mutate the input object -
const isort = (compare = asc, xs = ) =>
xs
.slice (0) // clone
.sort (compare) // then sort
And of course a and b are sometimes complex objects, so case we can't directly call asc or desc. Below contramap will transform our data before using one function g, before passing the data to the other function, f -
const contramap = (f, g) =>
(a, b) => f (g (a), g (b))
const files =
[ { general: { fileId: 'e' } }
, { general: { fileId: 'b' } }
, { general: { fileId: 'd' } }
, { general: { fileId: 'c' } }
, { general: { fileId: 'a' } }
]
isort
( contramap (asc, generalFileId) // ascending comparator
, files
)
// [ { general: { fileId: 'a' } }
// , { general: { fileId: 'b' } }
// , { general: { fileId: 'c' } }
// , { general: { fileId: 'd' } }
// , { general: { fileId: 'e' } }
// ]
Using the other comparator desc, we can see sorting work in the other direction -
isort
( contramap (desc, generalFileId) // descending comparator
, files
)
// [ { general: { fileId: 'e' } }
// , { general: { fileId: 'd' } }
// , { general: { fileId: 'c' } }
// , { general: { fileId: 'b' } }
// , { general: { fileId: 'a' } }
// ]
Now to write the method for your React component -
sortBy = (reverse = true) =>
this.setState
( { files:
isort
( contramap
( reverse ? desc : asc
, generalFileId
)
, this.state.files
)
}
)
This uses the boolean switch like in your original question, but since React embraces functional pattern, I think it would be even better as a higher-order function -
sortBy = (comparator = asc) =>
this.setState
( { files:
isort
( contramap
( comparator
, generalFileId
)
, this.state.files
)
}
)
If the nested property you need to access is not guaranteed to be general and fileId, we can make a generic function which accepts a list of properties and can lookup a nested property of any depth -
const deepProp = (o = {}, props = ) =>
props .reduce
( (acc, p) => // for each p, safely lookup p on child
acc .chain (child => safeProp (child, p))
, fromNullable (o) // init with Maybe o
)
const generalFileId = (o = {}) =>
deepProp (o, [ 'general', 'fileId' ]) // using deepProp
.getOrElse ('')
const fooBarQux = (o = {}) =>
deepProp (o, [ 'foo', 'bar', 'qux' ]) // any number of nested props
.getOrElse (0) // customizable default
console.log
( generalFileId ({ general: { fileId: 'a' } } ) // 'a'
, generalFileId ({}) // ''
, fooBarQux ({ foo: { bar: { qux: 1 } } } ) // 1
, fooBarQux ({ foo: { bar: 2 } }) // 0
, fooBarQux ({}) // 0
)
Above, we use the data.maybe package which provides us with the capability to work with potential values. The module exports functions to convert ordinary values to a Maybe, and vice versa, as well as many useful operations that are applicable to potential values. There's nothing forcing you to use this particular implementation, however. The concept is simple enough that you could implement fromNullable, Just and Nothing in a couple dozen lines, which we'll see later in this answer -
Run the complete demo below on repl.it
const { Just, Nothing, fromNullable } =
require ('data.maybe')
const safeProp = (o = {}, p = '') =>
Object (o) === o
? fromNullable (o[p])
: Nothing ()
const generalFileId = (o = {}) =>
safeProp (o, 'general')
.chain (child => safeProp (child, 'fileId'))
.getOrElse ('')
// ----------------------------------------------
const asc = (a, b) =>
a .localeCompare (b)
const desc = (a, b) =>
asc (a, b) * -1
const contramap = (f, g) =>
(a, b) => f (g (a), g (b))
const isort = (compare = asc, xs = ) =>
xs
.slice (0)
.sort (compare)
// ----------------------------------------------
const files =
[ { general: { fileId: 'e' } }
, { general: { fileId: 'b' } }
, { general: { fileId: 'd' } }
, { general: { fileId: 'c' } }
, { general: { fileId: 'a' } }
]
isort
( contramap (asc, generalFileId)
, files
)
// [ { general: { fileId: 'a' } }
// , { general: { fileId: 'b' } }
// , { general: { fileId: 'c' } }
// , { general: { fileId: 'd' } }
// , { general: { fileId: 'e' } }
// ]
The advantages to this approach should be evident. Instead of a one big complex function that is difficult to write, read, and test, we've combined several smaller functions that are easier to write, read, and test. The smaller functions have the added advantage of being used in other parts of your program, whereas the big complex function is likely to only be usable in one part.
Lastly, sortBy is implemented as a higher-order function which means we're not limited to only ascending and descending sorts toggled by the reverse boolean; any valid comparator can be used. This means we could even write an even more specialized comparator that handles tie-breaks using custom logic or compares prop1 first, then prop2, etc. Higher-order functions expand your possibilities tremendously.
I don't like making empty promises so I want to show you that it's not difficult to devise your own mechanisms like Maybe. This is also a nice lesson in data abstraction because it shows us how a module has its own set of concerns. The module's exported values are the only way provide access to the module's functionality; all other components of the module are private and free-to-change as the other requirements dictate -
// Maybe.js
const None =
Symbol ()
class Maybe
{ constructor (v)
{ this.value = v }
chain (f)
{ return this.value == None ? this : f (this.value) }
getOrElse (v)
{ return this.value === None ? v : this.value }
}
const Nothing = () =>
new Maybe (None)
const Just = v =>
new Maybe (v)
const fromNullable = v =>
v == null
? Nothing ()
: Just (v)
module.exports =
{ Just, Nothing, fromNullable } // note the class is hidden from the user
Then we would use it in our module. We only have to change the import (require) but everything else just works as-is because the public API of our module matches -
const { Just, Nothing, fromNullable } =
require ('./Maybe') // this time, use our own Maybe
const safeProp = (o = {}, p = '') => // nothing changes here
Object (o) === o
? fromNullable (o[p])
: Nothing ()
const deepProp = (o, props) => // nothing changes here
props .reduce
( (acc, p) =>
acc .chain (child => safeProp (child, p))
, fromNullable (o)
)
// ...
For more intuition on how to use contramap, and perhaps some unexpected surprises, please explore the following related answers -
- multi-sort using contramap
- recursive search using contramap
add a comment |
In this post, we'll write sortBy as -
sortBy = (comparator = asc) =>
this.setState
( { files:
isort
( contramap
( comparator
, generalFileId
)
, this.state.files
)
}
)
Your question introduces you to two cool functional concepts; we'll use these to answer the question -
- Monads
- Contravariant Functors
Let's not get overwhelmed by terms though and instead focus on gaining an intuition for how things work. At first, it looks like we have a problem checking for nulls. Having to deal with the possibility that some of our inputs may not have the nested properties makes our function messy. If we can generalize this concept of a possible value, we can clean things up a bit.
We'll start by writing a function safeProp that accepts an object and a property string as input. Intuitively, safeProp safely returns the property p of object o -
const { Nothing, fromNullable } =
require ('data.maybe')
const safeProp = (o = {}, p = '') =>
// if o is an object
Object (o) === o
// access property p on object o, wrapping the result in a Maybe
? fromNullable (o[p])
// otherwise o is not an object, return Nothing
: Nothing ()
Instead of simply returning o[p] which could be a null or undefined value, we'll get back a Maybe that guides us in handling the result -
const generalFileId = (o = {}) =>
// access the general property
safeProp (o, 'general')
// if it exists, access the fileId property on the child
.chain (child => safeProp (child, 'fileId'))
// get the result if valid, otherwise return empty string
.getOrElse ('')
Now we have a function which can take objects a varying complexity, and guarantees the result we're interested in -
console .log
( generalFileId ({ general: { fileId: 'a' } }) // 'a'
, generalFileId ({ general: { fileId: 'b' } }) // 'b'
, generalFileId ({ general: 'x' }) // ''
, generalFileId ({ a: 'x '}) // ''
, generalFileId ({ general: { err: 'x' } }) // ''
, generalFileId ({}) // ''
)
That's half the battle right there. We can now go from our complex object to the precise string value we want to use for comparison purposes.
I'm intentionally avoiding showing you an implementation of Maybe here because this in itself is a valuable lesson. When a module promises capability X, we assume we have capability X, and ignore what happens in the black box of the module. The very point of data abstraction is to hide concerns away so the programmer can think about things at a higher level. This applies regardless of whether the module is provided by a third party, such as from npm, or if you wrote the module yourself.
We'll show a basic implementation of Maybe later in the answer, but for now we just have to finish the sort ...
We start with two basic comparators, asc for ascending sort, and desc for descending sort -
const asc = (a, b) =>
a .localeCompare (b)
const desc = (a, b) =>
asc (a, b) * -1
In React, we cannot mutate previous state, instead we must create new state. So to sort, we must implement isort which will not mutate the input object -
const isort = (compare = asc, xs = ) =>
xs
.slice (0) // clone
.sort (compare) // then sort
And of course a and b are sometimes complex objects, so case we can't directly call asc or desc. Below contramap will transform our data before using one function g, before passing the data to the other function, f -
const contramap = (f, g) =>
(a, b) => f (g (a), g (b))
const files =
[ { general: { fileId: 'e' } }
, { general: { fileId: 'b' } }
, { general: { fileId: 'd' } }
, { general: { fileId: 'c' } }
, { general: { fileId: 'a' } }
]
isort
( contramap (asc, generalFileId) // ascending comparator
, files
)
// [ { general: { fileId: 'a' } }
// , { general: { fileId: 'b' } }
// , { general: { fileId: 'c' } }
// , { general: { fileId: 'd' } }
// , { general: { fileId: 'e' } }
// ]
Using the other comparator desc, we can see sorting work in the other direction -
isort
( contramap (desc, generalFileId) // descending comparator
, files
)
// [ { general: { fileId: 'e' } }
// , { general: { fileId: 'd' } }
// , { general: { fileId: 'c' } }
// , { general: { fileId: 'b' } }
// , { general: { fileId: 'a' } }
// ]
Now to write the method for your React component -
sortBy = (reverse = true) =>
this.setState
( { files:
isort
( contramap
( reverse ? desc : asc
, generalFileId
)
, this.state.files
)
}
)
This uses the boolean switch like in your original question, but since React embraces functional pattern, I think it would be even better as a higher-order function -
sortBy = (comparator = asc) =>
this.setState
( { files:
isort
( contramap
( comparator
, generalFileId
)
, this.state.files
)
}
)
If the nested property you need to access is not guaranteed to be general and fileId, we can make a generic function which accepts a list of properties and can lookup a nested property of any depth -
const deepProp = (o = {}, props = ) =>
props .reduce
( (acc, p) => // for each p, safely lookup p on child
acc .chain (child => safeProp (child, p))
, fromNullable (o) // init with Maybe o
)
const generalFileId = (o = {}) =>
deepProp (o, [ 'general', 'fileId' ]) // using deepProp
.getOrElse ('')
const fooBarQux = (o = {}) =>
deepProp (o, [ 'foo', 'bar', 'qux' ]) // any number of nested props
.getOrElse (0) // customizable default
console.log
( generalFileId ({ general: { fileId: 'a' } } ) // 'a'
, generalFileId ({}) // ''
, fooBarQux ({ foo: { bar: { qux: 1 } } } ) // 1
, fooBarQux ({ foo: { bar: 2 } }) // 0
, fooBarQux ({}) // 0
)
Above, we use the data.maybe package which provides us with the capability to work with potential values. The module exports functions to convert ordinary values to a Maybe, and vice versa, as well as many useful operations that are applicable to potential values. There's nothing forcing you to use this particular implementation, however. The concept is simple enough that you could implement fromNullable, Just and Nothing in a couple dozen lines, which we'll see later in this answer -
Run the complete demo below on repl.it
const { Just, Nothing, fromNullable } =
require ('data.maybe')
const safeProp = (o = {}, p = '') =>
Object (o) === o
? fromNullable (o[p])
: Nothing ()
const generalFileId = (o = {}) =>
safeProp (o, 'general')
.chain (child => safeProp (child, 'fileId'))
.getOrElse ('')
// ----------------------------------------------
const asc = (a, b) =>
a .localeCompare (b)
const desc = (a, b) =>
asc (a, b) * -1
const contramap = (f, g) =>
(a, b) => f (g (a), g (b))
const isort = (compare = asc, xs = ) =>
xs
.slice (0)
.sort (compare)
// ----------------------------------------------
const files =
[ { general: { fileId: 'e' } }
, { general: { fileId: 'b' } }
, { general: { fileId: 'd' } }
, { general: { fileId: 'c' } }
, { general: { fileId: 'a' } }
]
isort
( contramap (asc, generalFileId)
, files
)
// [ { general: { fileId: 'a' } }
// , { general: { fileId: 'b' } }
// , { general: { fileId: 'c' } }
// , { general: { fileId: 'd' } }
// , { general: { fileId: 'e' } }
// ]
The advantages to this approach should be evident. Instead of a one big complex function that is difficult to write, read, and test, we've combined several smaller functions that are easier to write, read, and test. The smaller functions have the added advantage of being used in other parts of your program, whereas the big complex function is likely to only be usable in one part.
Lastly, sortBy is implemented as a higher-order function which means we're not limited to only ascending and descending sorts toggled by the reverse boolean; any valid comparator can be used. This means we could even write an even more specialized comparator that handles tie-breaks using custom logic or compares prop1 first, then prop2, etc. Higher-order functions expand your possibilities tremendously.
I don't like making empty promises so I want to show you that it's not difficult to devise your own mechanisms like Maybe. This is also a nice lesson in data abstraction because it shows us how a module has its own set of concerns. The module's exported values are the only way provide access to the module's functionality; all other components of the module are private and free-to-change as the other requirements dictate -
// Maybe.js
const None =
Symbol ()
class Maybe
{ constructor (v)
{ this.value = v }
chain (f)
{ return this.value == None ? this : f (this.value) }
getOrElse (v)
{ return this.value === None ? v : this.value }
}
const Nothing = () =>
new Maybe (None)
const Just = v =>
new Maybe (v)
const fromNullable = v =>
v == null
? Nothing ()
: Just (v)
module.exports =
{ Just, Nothing, fromNullable } // note the class is hidden from the user
Then we would use it in our module. We only have to change the import (require) but everything else just works as-is because the public API of our module matches -
const { Just, Nothing, fromNullable } =
require ('./Maybe') // this time, use our own Maybe
const safeProp = (o = {}, p = '') => // nothing changes here
Object (o) === o
? fromNullable (o[p])
: Nothing ()
const deepProp = (o, props) => // nothing changes here
props .reduce
( (acc, p) =>
acc .chain (child => safeProp (child, p))
, fromNullable (o)
)
// ...
For more intuition on how to use contramap, and perhaps some unexpected surprises, please explore the following related answers -
- multi-sort using contramap
- recursive search using contramap
In this post, we'll write sortBy as -
sortBy = (comparator = asc) =>
this.setState
( { files:
isort
( contramap
( comparator
, generalFileId
)
, this.state.files
)
}
)
Your question introduces you to two cool functional concepts; we'll use these to answer the question -
- Monads
- Contravariant Functors
Let's not get overwhelmed by terms though and instead focus on gaining an intuition for how things work. At first, it looks like we have a problem checking for nulls. Having to deal with the possibility that some of our inputs may not have the nested properties makes our function messy. If we can generalize this concept of a possible value, we can clean things up a bit.
We'll start by writing a function safeProp that accepts an object and a property string as input. Intuitively, safeProp safely returns the property p of object o -
const { Nothing, fromNullable } =
require ('data.maybe')
const safeProp = (o = {}, p = '') =>
// if o is an object
Object (o) === o
// access property p on object o, wrapping the result in a Maybe
? fromNullable (o[p])
// otherwise o is not an object, return Nothing
: Nothing ()
Instead of simply returning o[p] which could be a null or undefined value, we'll get back a Maybe that guides us in handling the result -
const generalFileId = (o = {}) =>
// access the general property
safeProp (o, 'general')
// if it exists, access the fileId property on the child
.chain (child => safeProp (child, 'fileId'))
// get the result if valid, otherwise return empty string
.getOrElse ('')
Now we have a function which can take objects a varying complexity, and guarantees the result we're interested in -
console .log
( generalFileId ({ general: { fileId: 'a' } }) // 'a'
, generalFileId ({ general: { fileId: 'b' } }) // 'b'
, generalFileId ({ general: 'x' }) // ''
, generalFileId ({ a: 'x '}) // ''
, generalFileId ({ general: { err: 'x' } }) // ''
, generalFileId ({}) // ''
)
That's half the battle right there. We can now go from our complex object to the precise string value we want to use for comparison purposes.
I'm intentionally avoiding showing you an implementation of Maybe here because this in itself is a valuable lesson. When a module promises capability X, we assume we have capability X, and ignore what happens in the black box of the module. The very point of data abstraction is to hide concerns away so the programmer can think about things at a higher level. This applies regardless of whether the module is provided by a third party, such as from npm, or if you wrote the module yourself.
We'll show a basic implementation of Maybe later in the answer, but for now we just have to finish the sort ...
We start with two basic comparators, asc for ascending sort, and desc for descending sort -
const asc = (a, b) =>
a .localeCompare (b)
const desc = (a, b) =>
asc (a, b) * -1
In React, we cannot mutate previous state, instead we must create new state. So to sort, we must implement isort which will not mutate the input object -
const isort = (compare = asc, xs = ) =>
xs
.slice (0) // clone
.sort (compare) // then sort
And of course a and b are sometimes complex objects, so case we can't directly call asc or desc. Below contramap will transform our data before using one function g, before passing the data to the other function, f -
const contramap = (f, g) =>
(a, b) => f (g (a), g (b))
const files =
[ { general: { fileId: 'e' } }
, { general: { fileId: 'b' } }
, { general: { fileId: 'd' } }
, { general: { fileId: 'c' } }
, { general: { fileId: 'a' } }
]
isort
( contramap (asc, generalFileId) // ascending comparator
, files
)
// [ { general: { fileId: 'a' } }
// , { general: { fileId: 'b' } }
// , { general: { fileId: 'c' } }
// , { general: { fileId: 'd' } }
// , { general: { fileId: 'e' } }
// ]
Using the other comparator desc, we can see sorting work in the other direction -
isort
( contramap (desc, generalFileId) // descending comparator
, files
)
// [ { general: { fileId: 'e' } }
// , { general: { fileId: 'd' } }
// , { general: { fileId: 'c' } }
// , { general: { fileId: 'b' } }
// , { general: { fileId: 'a' } }
// ]
Now to write the method for your React component -
sortBy = (reverse = true) =>
this.setState
( { files:
isort
( contramap
( reverse ? desc : asc
, generalFileId
)
, this.state.files
)
}
)
This uses the boolean switch like in your original question, but since React embraces functional pattern, I think it would be even better as a higher-order function -
sortBy = (comparator = asc) =>
this.setState
( { files:
isort
( contramap
( comparator
, generalFileId
)
, this.state.files
)
}
)
If the nested property you need to access is not guaranteed to be general and fileId, we can make a generic function which accepts a list of properties and can lookup a nested property of any depth -
const deepProp = (o = {}, props = ) =>
props .reduce
( (acc, p) => // for each p, safely lookup p on child
acc .chain (child => safeProp (child, p))
, fromNullable (o) // init with Maybe o
)
const generalFileId = (o = {}) =>
deepProp (o, [ 'general', 'fileId' ]) // using deepProp
.getOrElse ('')
const fooBarQux = (o = {}) =>
deepProp (o, [ 'foo', 'bar', 'qux' ]) // any number of nested props
.getOrElse (0) // customizable default
console.log
( generalFileId ({ general: { fileId: 'a' } } ) // 'a'
, generalFileId ({}) // ''
, fooBarQux ({ foo: { bar: { qux: 1 } } } ) // 1
, fooBarQux ({ foo: { bar: 2 } }) // 0
, fooBarQux ({}) // 0
)
Above, we use the data.maybe package which provides us with the capability to work with potential values. The module exports functions to convert ordinary values to a Maybe, and vice versa, as well as many useful operations that are applicable to potential values. There's nothing forcing you to use this particular implementation, however. The concept is simple enough that you could implement fromNullable, Just and Nothing in a couple dozen lines, which we'll see later in this answer -
Run the complete demo below on repl.it
const { Just, Nothing, fromNullable } =
require ('data.maybe')
const safeProp = (o = {}, p = '') =>
Object (o) === o
? fromNullable (o[p])
: Nothing ()
const generalFileId = (o = {}) =>
safeProp (o, 'general')
.chain (child => safeProp (child, 'fileId'))
.getOrElse ('')
// ----------------------------------------------
const asc = (a, b) =>
a .localeCompare (b)
const desc = (a, b) =>
asc (a, b) * -1
const contramap = (f, g) =>
(a, b) => f (g (a), g (b))
const isort = (compare = asc, xs = ) =>
xs
.slice (0)
.sort (compare)
// ----------------------------------------------
const files =
[ { general: { fileId: 'e' } }
, { general: { fileId: 'b' } }
, { general: { fileId: 'd' } }
, { general: { fileId: 'c' } }
, { general: { fileId: 'a' } }
]
isort
( contramap (asc, generalFileId)
, files
)
// [ { general: { fileId: 'a' } }
// , { general: { fileId: 'b' } }
// , { general: { fileId: 'c' } }
// , { general: { fileId: 'd' } }
// , { general: { fileId: 'e' } }
// ]
The advantages to this approach should be evident. Instead of a one big complex function that is difficult to write, read, and test, we've combined several smaller functions that are easier to write, read, and test. The smaller functions have the added advantage of being used in other parts of your program, whereas the big complex function is likely to only be usable in one part.
Lastly, sortBy is implemented as a higher-order function which means we're not limited to only ascending and descending sorts toggled by the reverse boolean; any valid comparator can be used. This means we could even write an even more specialized comparator that handles tie-breaks using custom logic or compares prop1 first, then prop2, etc. Higher-order functions expand your possibilities tremendously.
I don't like making empty promises so I want to show you that it's not difficult to devise your own mechanisms like Maybe. This is also a nice lesson in data abstraction because it shows us how a module has its own set of concerns. The module's exported values are the only way provide access to the module's functionality; all other components of the module are private and free-to-change as the other requirements dictate -
// Maybe.js
const None =
Symbol ()
class Maybe
{ constructor (v)
{ this.value = v }
chain (f)
{ return this.value == None ? this : f (this.value) }
getOrElse (v)
{ return this.value === None ? v : this.value }
}
const Nothing = () =>
new Maybe (None)
const Just = v =>
new Maybe (v)
const fromNullable = v =>
v == null
? Nothing ()
: Just (v)
module.exports =
{ Just, Nothing, fromNullable } // note the class is hidden from the user
Then we would use it in our module. We only have to change the import (require) but everything else just works as-is because the public API of our module matches -
const { Just, Nothing, fromNullable } =
require ('./Maybe') // this time, use our own Maybe
const safeProp = (o = {}, p = '') => // nothing changes here
Object (o) === o
? fromNullable (o[p])
: Nothing ()
const deepProp = (o, props) => // nothing changes here
props .reduce
( (acc, p) =>
acc .chain (child => safeProp (child, p))
, fromNullable (o)
)
// ...
For more intuition on how to use contramap, and perhaps some unexpected surprises, please explore the following related answers -
- multi-sort using contramap
- recursive search using contramap
edited 3 mins ago
answered 2 hours ago
user633183user633183
70.6k21139179
70.6k21139179
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
var $window = $(window),
onScroll = function(e) {
var $elem = $('.new-login-left'),
docViewTop = $window.scrollTop(),
docViewBottom = docViewTop + $window.height(),
elemTop = $elem.offset().top,
elemBottom = elemTop + $elem.height();
if ((docViewTop elemBottom)) {
StackExchange.using('gps', function() { StackExchange.gps.track('embedded_signup_form.view', { location: 'question_page' }); });
$window.unbind('scroll', onScroll);
}
};
$window.on('scroll', onScroll);
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f54735985%2fsort-objects-in-array-with-dynamic-nested-property-keys%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
var $window = $(window),
onScroll = function(e) {
var $elem = $('.new-login-left'),
docViewTop = $window.scrollTop(),
docViewBottom = docViewTop + $window.height(),
elemTop = $elem.offset().top,
elemBottom = elemTop + $elem.height();
if ((docViewTop elemBottom)) {
StackExchange.using('gps', function() { StackExchange.gps.track('embedded_signup_form.view', { location: 'question_page' }); });
$window.unbind('scroll', onScroll);
}
};
$window.on('scroll', onScroll);
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
var $window = $(window),
onScroll = function(e) {
var $elem = $('.new-login-left'),
docViewTop = $window.scrollTop(),
docViewBottom = docViewTop + $window.height(),
elemTop = $elem.offset().top,
elemBottom = elemTop + $elem.height();
if ((docViewTop elemBottom)) {
StackExchange.using('gps', function() { StackExchange.gps.track('embedded_signup_form.view', { location: 'question_page' }); });
$window.unbind('scroll', onScroll);
}
};
$window.on('scroll', onScroll);
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
var $window = $(window),
onScroll = function(e) {
var $elem = $('.new-login-left'),
docViewTop = $window.scrollTop(),
docViewBottom = docViewTop + $window.height(),
elemTop = $elem.offset().top,
elemBottom = elemTop + $elem.height();
if ((docViewTop elemBottom)) {
StackExchange.using('gps', function() { StackExchange.gps.track('embedded_signup_form.view', { location: 'question_page' }); });
$window.unbind('scroll', onScroll);
}
};
$window.on('scroll', onScroll);
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
will it contain just two keys or that also can be dynamic
– Shubham Khatri
4 hours ago
Sorry for not mentioning. In my current project it can be up to 4 keys so it has to be dynamic
– Thore
4 hours ago