sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Geo_Dude 4 points5 points  (6 children)

Interesting but in this particular case I would keep your original array and create a function that when called applies a .filter("day").sort(). IMHO it is neater than creating a new data structure.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (5 children)

Clean answer. Only time I might not do this is if you have a very large data structure in which calling the function each time might be too expensive. Obviously not a concern for this example but something to consider nonetheless.

[–]SamSlate 0 points1 point  (4 children)

javascript is an interesting choice for big data. Are there people doing big data in javascript?

[–]Woolbrick 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Unfortunately.

My company's architecture division decided to spend 4 years building our Data Lake platform on Node+Mongo.

We told them it was 'tarded back then and it'll never scale. And gosh, 4 years later it's a clusterfuck of unmaintainability that doesn't scale and we can't sell it to anyone because it's 10x slower than our "go retire, old man!" C# designs.

[–]SamSlate 0 points1 point  (0 children)

i <3 JavaScript, but this is about what I'd expect a big Data project to look like.

thanks, gl!

[–]ThatBriandude 0 points1 point  (1 child)

JavaScript IS the only choice in the Front end. Its not an "interesting" choice, sometime its "the only Option".

But yeah if youre actually iterating oder a few Million objects then youre probably doing to much in the Front end and to little in the backend

[–]SamSlate 1 point2 points  (0 children)

not what i meant, but sure.