Problem
I have implemented the “Sum All Numbers in a Range” challenge from Free Code Camp quoted below.
The code works like a charm, but I don’t think it’s idiomatic. The challenge hints imply I should be using Math.max()
, Math.min()
and Array.reduce()
. In addition I used the spread operator from ES6 to simplify both Math
calls.
I’m looking for a more idiomatic way to solve this. I think it can be done in a one-liner, something like:
return arr.sort((function(a, b) { return a - b; })).reduce(function(a, b) { /* */ });
But I’m pretty sure I’m heading the wrong way with the above.
The challenge:
We’ll pass you an array of two numbers. Return the sum of those two numbers and all numbers between them.
The lowest number will not always come first.
The code:
function sumAll(arr) {
var out = 0;
for (var i = Math.min(...arr); i <= Math.max(...arr); i++) {
out += i;
}
return out;
}
Test cases:
sumAll([1, 4])
sumAll([4, 1])
sumAll([5, 10])
sumAll([10, 5])
Expected output:
10
10
45
45
Solution
I don’t know what you would use reduce()
for to be honest. But you don’t need to loop. We just have a simple arithmetic sequence with a straightforward formula:
We just need to pick out which one is larger:
function sumFrom(min, max) {
return (max-min+1) * (min+max) / 2;
}
function sumAll(arr) {
return sumFrom(Math.min(...arr), Math.max(...arr));
}
Or we could generalize to any arithmetic sequence:
function sumArithmetic(a1, n, d) {
return n*(2*a1 + (n-1)*d) / 2;
}
function sumAll(arr) {
var min = Math.min(...arr);
return sumArithmetic(min, Math.max(...arr) - min + 1, 1);
}
I guess if you really want reduce()
you’d do it this way (not using ES6 because I don’t know how to get freecodecamp to use it):
function sumAll(arr) {
var min = Math.min.apply(null, arr);
var max = Math.max.apply(null, arr);
return Array.apply(null, Array(max-min+1)) // get array of correct size
.map(function(_, b) { return b+min; }) // change it to have correct values
.reduce(function(a, b) { return a+b; }); // and sum it
}
Like Barry mentioned, you are probably expected to use Gauss and the property of triangular numbers.
reduce
is a funny way of accessing your array without touching the indexes, hence without needing to verify that they exist. (consider what would happen if your function was called with []
or [0]
).
The one-liner you give is very close. In the final function you have a
and b
being the min
and max
values in that order. just apply the sum formula to it: return (a+b)*(b-a+1)/2;
So:
return arr
.sort((a, b) => a - b)
.reduce((a, b) => (a + b) * (b - a + 1) / 2);
You’ll notice that since the array is size 2 and known to be that way, the complexity is O(1)
, while if you actually sum the numbers, it becomes O(n)
where n is the amount of numbers to add.
Personally, I’d change out
to result
. And also the structure in something like the following:
function sumAll(arr){
var smallest = 0;
var greatest = 0;
if(arr[0] < arr[1]){
smallest = arr[0];
greatest = arr[1];
} else{
smallest = arr[1];
greatest = arr[0];
}
return sumRange(smallest, greatest);
}
function sumRange(from, to){
var result = 0;
for(var i = from; i <= to; i++){
result += i;
}
return result;
}
In this way it becomes more readable IMO.