Simplest way to merge ES6 Maps/Sets?

2019-01-13 00:37发布

Is there a simple way to merge ES6 Maps together (like Object.assign)? And while we're at it, what about ES6 Sets (like Array.concat)?

9条回答
乱世女痞
2楼-- · 2019-01-13 00:49

For sets:

var merged = new Set([...set1, ...set2, ...set3])

For maps:

var merged = new Map([...map1, ...map2, ...map3])

Note that if multiple maps have the same key, the value of the merged map will be the value of the last merging map with that key.

查看更多
贪生不怕死
3楼-- · 2019-01-13 00:50

Here's my solution using generators:

For Maps:

let map1 = new Map(), map2 = new Map();

map1.set('a', 'foo');
map1.set('b', 'bar');
map2.set('b', 'baz');
map2.set('c', 'bazz');

let map3 = new Map(function*() { yield* map1; yield* map2; }());

console.log(Array.from(map3)); // Result: [ [ 'a', 'foo' ], [ 'b', 'baz' ], [ 'c', 'bazz' ] ]

For Sets:

let set1 = new Set(['foo', 'bar']), set2 = new Set(['bar', 'baz']);

let set3 = new Set(function*() { yield* set1; yield* set2; }());

console.log(Array.from(set3)); // Result: [ 'foo', 'bar', 'baz' ]
查看更多
Juvenile、少年°
4楼-- · 2019-01-13 00:54

For reasons I do not understand, you cannot directly add the contents of one Set to another with a built-in operation.

It would seem a natural for .add() to have detected that you were passing another Set object and then just grab all the items out of that Set (which is how my own Set object -before there was an ES6 Set specification) works. But, they chose not to implement it that way.

Instead, you can do it with a single .forEach() line:

var s = new Set([1,2,3]);
var t = new Set([4,5,6]);

t.forEach(s.add, s);
console.log(s);   // 1,2,3,4,5,6

And, for a Map, you could do this:

var s = new Map([["key1", 1], ["key2", 2]]);
var t = new Map([["key3", 3], ["key4", 4]]);

t.forEach(function(value, key) {
    s.set(key, value);
});
查看更多
【Aperson】
5楼-- · 2019-01-13 00:54

The approved answer is great but that creates a new set every time.

If you want to mutate an existing object instead, use a helper function.

Set

function concatSets(set, ...iterables) {
    for (const iterable of iterables) {
        for (const item of iterable) {
            set.add(item);
        }
    }
}

Usage:

const setA = new Set([1, 2, 3]);
const setB = new Set([4, 5, 6]);
const setC = new Set([7, 8, 9]);
concatSets(setA, setB, setC);
// setA will have items 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9

Map

function concatMaps(map, ...iterables) {
    for (const iterable of iterables) {
        for (const item of iterable) {
            map.set(...item);
        }
    }
}

Usage:

const mapA = new Map().set('S', 1).set('P', 2);
const mapB = new Map().set('Q', 3).set('R', 4);
concatMaps(mapA, mapB);
// mapA will have items ['S', 1], ['P', 2], ['Q', 3], ['R', 4]
查看更多
时光不老,我们不散
6楼-- · 2019-01-13 00:57

To merge the sets in the array Sets, you can do

var Sets = [set1, set2, set3];

var merged = new Set([].concat(...Sets.map(set => Array.from(set))));

It is slightly mysterious to me why the following, which should be equivalent, fails at least in Babel:

var merged = new Set([].concat(...Sets.map(Array.from)));
查看更多
beautiful°
7楼-- · 2019-01-13 01:02

Edit:

I benchmarked my original solution against other solutions suggests here and found that it is very inefficient.

The benchmark itself is very interesting (link) It compares 3 solutions (higher is better):

  • @bfred.it's solution, which adds values one by one (14,955 op/sec)
  • @jameslk's solution, which uses a self invoking generator (5,089 op/sec)
  • my own, which uses reduce & spread (3,434 op/sec)

As you can see, @bfred.it's solution is definitely the winner.

Performance + Immutability

With that in mind, here's a slightly modified version which doesn't mutates the original set and excepts a variable number of iterables to combine as arguments:

function union(...iterables) {
  const set = new Set();

  for (let iterable of iterables) {
    for (let item of iterable) {
      set.add(item);
    }
  }

  return set;
}

Usage:

const a = new Set([1, 2, 3]);
const b = new Set([1, 3, 5]);
const c = new Set([4, 5, 6]);

union(a,b,c) // {1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6}

Original Answer

I would like to suggest another approach, using reduce and the spread operator:

Implementation

function union (sets) {
  return sets.reduce((combined, list) => {
    return new Set([...combined, ...list]);
  }, new Set());
}

Usage:

const a = new Set([1, 2, 3]);
const b = new Set([1, 3, 5]);
const c = new Set([4, 5, 6]);

union([a, b, c]) // {1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6}

Tip:

We can also make use of the rest operator to make the interface a bit nicer:

function union (...sets) {
  return sets.reduce((combined, list) => {
    return new Set([...combined, ...list]);
  }, new Set());
}

Now, instead of passing an array of sets, we can pass an arbitrary number of arguments of sets:

union(a, b, c) // {1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6}
查看更多
登录 后发表回答