### Challenge: Get Closest Number in an Array

#### Andy Zhao on February 20, 2019

Given an array of numbers nums, and a given number given_num:
nums = [100, 200, 400, 800, 1600, 3200, 6400, 128000]
given_num = 900
Get th...
[Read Full]

Javascript:Let's go for a JS one liner 😉

This causes the original array to have its order changed but I don't think that's against the rules 😅

I dont think use

`sort`

is good idea:Let see:

By including a function to sort by I'm no longer doing an alphabetical sort, which means this problem no longer exists.

developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/W...

yes, by including

compareFunctioncallback, we can solve this problem.If it outputs the closest number, it works! :)

Window functions!

hahaha thinking outside the box :D

I looked at it again just now and the

`row_number`

is redundant anyway...This is a job for Reduce!

JavaScript:

Ruby:

Shamelessly taken from Stack Overflow 🙃 I was in a much more of a "just give me the answer" mood than "let's figure it out" mood.

Here goes Python !

Java:

Trying to optimize no of lines with Java 8 Streams and Lambda.

Using JavaScript

`Set`

:Or we can save the intermediate array:

And there is another perspective, instead of iterating numbers, we can iterate distances. Like:

This will normally be slower, but in cases like:

`nums = [10000000, 9999999, 9999998, ..., 1]`

`given_num = 10000001`

It will be much faster than other algorithms.

I have written a benchmark function for this:

You can test your function via

`benchmark(func)`

.The solution above yields:

`closest_num: 5037.456787109375ms`

in Chrome.

A Python implementation:

Perl solution:

Here's some C# for everyone:

nums = [100, 200, 400, 800, 1600, 3200, 6400, 128000];

given_num = 900

Here is my solution:

Usage:

Result:

Be careful that

`...`

can cause a range error:`RangeError: Maximum call stack size exceeded`

when the

`nums`

array is very large.With the help of google, I was able to find the answer to this 😅

import numpy as np

def find_nearest(array, value):

array = np.array(array)

z=np.abs(array-value)

y= np.where(z == z.min())

m=np.array(y)

x=m[0,0]

y=m[1,0]

near_value=array[x,y]

array =np.array([[100, 200, 400, 800, 1600, 3200, 6400, 128000]])

print(array)

value = 900

print(find_nearest(array, value))

## Answer:

Thanks for this challenge! 🍺

play.golang.org/p/xxzN4y-fPF0

Hey! Let's do it the Scala way:

Thanks for the challenge!

C++, O(n), no sorting, no extra memory allocation beyond storing the input:

OCaml with list instead of array

Wolfram Language!

I knew that one day my subscription will come in handy...

Rust 🦀

Nice, didn't know Rust had similar syntax to Ruby!

What if there are two numbers that are equally close to the given number?

I think you should point this out in the description.

I probably over complicated it, but here's a CodePen link with how I did it in JS and outputted it to the HTML side.

Long as you solved it! 👍

JS:

const nums = [100, 200, 400, 800, 1600, 3200, 6400, 128000];

const givenNum = 900;

nums

.map(n => ({n, d: Math.abs(n-givenNum)}))

.sort((n1, n2) => Math.sign(n1.d - n2.d))[0].n

If the given array is ascending/descending, then the task becomes a binary search.

The pleasure of programming lies in that even those things appearing to be very simple are also worth thinking.

yeah, that's why I used a binary search library function in my answer :)