Скачать или смотреть Fixing indexOf False Positives in JavaScript String Search Function

Learn how to avoid false positives in string searching using the `includes()` method in JavaScript for accurate results.
---
This video is based on the question https://stackoverflow.com/q/65555690/ asked by the user 'uu88' ( https://stackoverflow.com/u/11043078/ ) and on the answer https://stackoverflow.com/a/65555780/ provided by the user 'charlietfl' ( https://stackoverflow.com/u/1175966/ ) at 'Stack Overflow' website. Thanks to these great users and Stackexchange community for their contributions.

Visit these links for original content and any more details, such as alternate solutions, latest updates/developments on topic, comments, revision history etc. For example, the original title of the Question was: indexOf gives false positives

Also, Content (except music) licensed under CC BY-SA https://meta.stackexchange.com/help/l...
The original Question post is licensed under the 'CC BY-SA 4.0' ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/... ) license, and the original Answer post is licensed under the 'CC BY-SA 4.0' ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/... ) license.

If anything seems off to you, please feel free to write me at vlogize [AT] gmail [DOT] com.
---
Fixing indexOf False Positives in JavaScript String Search Function

In the world of programming, debugging is a common challenge, especially when working with functions that promote efficient searching. A common issue developers run into is when a function designed to check for the presence of a word in a string mistakenly returns a false result. This is often caused by the way string indexes are checked. In this post, we will explore a specific instance of this issue using a function called str_find and how to adeptly resolve it.

The Problem: False Positives with indexOf

Consider a scenario where you are trying to determine whether a specific word exists within a string. Your function, str_find, is set up to accomplish this, but sometimes it inaccurately returns false when it should return true.

Here's an excerpt of how you might call this function:

[[See Video to Reveal this Text or Code Snippet]]

In this case, the expected result is true. However, due to how the original code structure checks for word presence (using indexOf), you may end up with unexpected results. Why does this happen? Let's dive deeper to understand it.

Understanding indexOf

The indexOf method returns the first position at which a given string can be found in the calling string, or -1 if it is not found at all. A key point to note here is that an index of 0 (the first position in the string) indicates the word is present, but the original function checks for values greater than 0.

This is where the false positive results arise, as checking for > 0 will miss any instance of the word that starts right at the beginning of the string.

The Solution: Utilizing includes()

A more effective approach is to use the includes() method, which checks if one string is contained within another. This method returns a boolean value (true or false), providing a straightforward solution.

Refactoring the str_find Function

Here’s how you can refactor the str_find function to eliminate the false positives by replacing indexOf with includes:

[[See Video to Reveal this Text or Code Snippet]]

Demonstration

Let’s see how the new function behaves:

[[See Video to Reveal this Text or Code Snippet]]

Benefits of Using includes()

Simplicity: The includes() method is concise and easier to understand.

Precision: It accurately checks for word presence without the caveat of index positions.

Readability: Code is more readable, making it easier for others (or you in the future) to understand what the function does.

Conclusion

When it comes to checking the presence of strings in JavaScript, opting for the includes() method over indexOf reduces the likelihood of running into false positives. By refactoring your function as demonstrated, you can create a more efficient, reliable, and easy-to-read solution for string searching. Happy coding!