144

Say I have this code

var arr = [{id:1,name:'a'},{id:2,name:'b'},{id:3,name:'c'}];

and I want to remove the item with id = 3 from the array. Is there a way of doing this without splicing? Maye something using underscore or something like that?

Thanks!

7
  • If you don't want to create a new array, splicing is the only choice. I bet underscore uses it too (internally, if such a method exist). Commented Jun 7, 2013 at 23:10
  • 6
    What's wrong with splicing? Commented Jun 7, 2013 at 23:11
  • Have you checked underscore's reference? Commented Jun 7, 2013 at 23:12
  • Just using plain JavaScript, this is a duplicate of remove objects from array by object property. Commented Jun 7, 2013 at 23:13
  • 5
    well is not duplicate as it has the tag for underscore.js Commented Oct 29, 2013 at 17:39

12 Answers 12

288

Just using plain JavaScript, this has been answered already: remove objects from array by object property.

Using underscore.js, you could combine .findWhere with .without:

var arr = [{
  id: 1,
  name: 'a'
}, {
  id: 2,
  name: 'b'
}, {
  id: 3,
  name: 'c'
}];

//substract third
arr = _.without(arr, _.findWhere(arr, {
  id: 3
}));
console.log(arr);
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/underscore.js/1.8.3/underscore-min.js"></script>

Although, since you are creating a new array in this case anyway, you could simply use _.filter or the native Array.prototype.filter function (just like shown in the other question). Then you would only iterate over array once instead of potentially twice like here.

If you want to modify the array in-place, you have to use .splice. This is also shown in the other question and undescore doesn't seem to provide any useful function for that.

Sign up to request clarification or add additional context in comments.

7 Comments

Yep this works perfectly, I did go over the underscore documentation but didn't quite understand how to pull it out with without. Thank you!
Wouldn't _.reject or _.filter() be a lot more efficient here? You'd end up with two iterations of the list just to pull out one item.
This might be a duplicate but this is the better answer.
@RickStrahl You are right. _.reject looks like a better selection here.
@lukaserat to pop the last element, use arr.pop()...
|
101

You can use Underscore .filter

    var arr = [{
      id: 1,
      name: 'a'
    }, {
      id: 2,
      name: 'b'
    }, {
      id: 3,
      name: 'c'
    }];

    var filtered = _(arr).filter(function(item) {
         return item.id !== 3
    });

Can also be written as:

var filtered = arr.filter(function(item) {
    return item.id !== 3
});

var filtered = _.filter(arr, function(item) {
    return item.id !== 3
});

Check Fiddle

You can also use .reject

3 Comments

I think you meant: var filtered = _.filter(arr, function(item) { return item.id !== 3 });
@tbh__ _() will create a wrapper around the collection which will let you invoke underscore methods.
Been using underscore for years, I never knew this. Thanks
39

Use Underscore _.reject():

arr = _.reject(arr, function(d){ return d.id === 3; });

1 Comment

with es6 you can do arr = _.reject(arr, d => d.id === 3 );
18

Underscore has a _without() method perfect for removing an item from an array, especially if you have the object to remove.

Returns a copy of the array with all instances of the values removed.

_.without(["bob", "sam", "fred"], "sam");

=> ["bob", "fred"]

Works with more complex objects too.

var bob = { Name: "Bob", Age: 35 };
var sam = { Name: "Sam", Age: 19 };
var fred = { Name: "Fred", Age: 50 };

var people = [bob, sam, fred]

_.without(people, sam);

=> [{ Name: "Bob", Age: 35 }, { Name: "Fred", Age: 50 }];

If you don't have the item to remove, just a property of it, you can use _.findWhere and then _.without.

1 Comment

Note: this only works because you're passing the sam object to without. If you instead pass { Name: "Sam", Age: 19 } to without, rather than the variable sam, it no longer works. Fiddle
6

Please exercise care if you are filtering strings and looking for case insensitive filters. _.without() is case sensitive. You can also use _.reject() as shown below.

var arr = ["test","test1","test2"];

var filtered = _.filter(arr, function(arrItem) {
    return arrItem.toLowerCase() !== "TEST".toLowerCase();
});
console.log(filtered);
// ["test1", "test2"]

var filtered1 = _.without(arr,"TEST");
console.log(filtered1);
// ["test", "test1", "test2"]

var filtered2 = _.reject(arr, function(arrItem){ 
    return arrItem.toLowerCase() === "TEST".toLowerCase();
});
console.log(filtered2);
// ["test1", "test2"]

Comments

6

Other answers create a new copy of the array, if you want to modify the array in place you can use:

arr.splice(_.findIndex(arr, { id: 3 }), 1);

But that assumes that the element will always be found inside the array (because if is not found it will still remove the last element). To be safe you can use:

var index = _.findIndex(arr, { id: 3 });
if (index > -1) {
    arr.splice(index, 1);
}

Comments

2

or another handy way:

_.omit(arr, _.findWhere(arr, {id: 3}));

my 2 cents

2 Comments

omit works on object and returns an object. hence not vey good for working with Arrays where we might expect to get an array back after removing an element.
So, _.without is the on you're looking at: _.without([1, 2, 1, 0, 3, 1, 4], 0, 1); => [2, 3, 4]
2

Use can use plain JavaScript's Array#filter method like this:

var arr = [{id:1,name:'a'},{id:2,name:'b'},{id:3,name:'c'}];

var filteredArr = arr.filter(obj => obj.id != 3);

console.log(filteredArr);

Or, use Array#reduce and Array#concat methods like this:

var arr = [{id:1,name:'a'},{id:2,name:'b'},{id:3,name:'c'}];

var reducedArr = arr.reduce((accumulator, currObj) => {
  return (currObj.id != 3) ? accumulator.concat(currObj) : accumulator;
}, []);

console.log(reducedArr);

NOTE:

  • Both of these are pure functional approach (i.e. they don't modify the existing array).
  • No, external library is required in these approach (Vanilla JavaScript is enough).

Comments

0

I used to try this method

_.filter(data, function(d) { return d.name != 'a' });

There might be better methods too like the above solutions provided by users

Comments

0

By Using underscore.js

var arr = [{id:1,name:'a'},{id:2,name:'b'},{id:3,name:'c'}];

var resultArr = _.reject(arr,{id:3});

console.log(resultArr);

The result will be :: [{id:1name:'a'},{id:2,name:'c'}]

Comments

-1

You can use reject method of Underscore, below will return a new array which won't have array with particular match

arr = _.reject(arr, function(objArr){ return objArr.id == 3; });

Comments

-1

lodash can be used:

_.compact(arr);

1 Comment

Underscore has compact, too. More importantly, this does not answer the question because _.compact only removes falsy values.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Start asking to get answers

Find the answer to your question by asking.

Ask question

Explore related questions

See similar questions with these tags.