Recently, I posted a small snippet on how to remove duplicates from an array using a filter function. That started a thread on all the different wa...
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
You could sort the array first and then all duplicates will be next to each other:
why did you use an instance of the numbers array, not the number array itself? " [...numbers].sort() not numbers.sort() "
That is a good question, sort is a destructive function. This means running sort on numbers array will change original numbers array.
wow I forgot that
Great ways but is it efficient to use the sets method? Especially in the big arrays.
I'd imagine if you were using a
Set
from the start, and adding values via the.add
method on theSet
object, you wouldn't need to store or iterate through the all the duplicates. That won't help if you needed to retain all the dupe data for some other uses though.I agree that in some use cases you can't use
Set
. Actually, in some cases, you can't even use it from the beginning, As an example, if you want to have a collection of unique objects,Set
won't help.There is a topic on the StackOverflow showing the set is faster. I do personally like filter more, but in most cases, you won't see the difference, and you can go for what looks best in your code.
That's good. Thanks.
and,, you can create a funtion for it,,
Ah yes, spread operator, love that one :smilery: