How's my FizzBuzz solution for a beginner?












7














I'm sure everyone here knows what FizzBuzz is. I would like constructive criticism for my solution.



I'm a beginner to programming as a whole and this isn't my first solution, but it's what I think is my best solution. I'd like to see if this is a reasonable solution, or is just plain terrible.



for(var i=1;i<=100;i++) {

var output = "";



    if(i % 15 == 0) {output = "FizzBuzz"}

    else if(i % 3 == 0) {output = "Fizz"}

    else if(i % 5 == 0) {output = "Buzz"}

    else {output = i;}



console.log(output);

}


The output is correct. It's your standard FizzBuzz output.






javascript beginner fizzbuzz iteration







share|improve this question















migrated from stackoverflow.com 16 hours ago


This question came from our site for professional and enthusiast programmers.











  • 3




    It's hard to give constructive criticism on such a small, simple function. It's a reasonable solution and the only things I could pick out being wrong would be me being extremely picky or a personal preference.
    – George
    15 hours ago








  • 2




    You could go with var output = i; and then remove that final else block.
    – user189829
    15 hours ago
















7














I'm sure everyone here knows what FizzBuzz is. I would like constructive criticism for my solution.



I'm a beginner to programming as a whole and this isn't my first solution, but it's what I think is my best solution. I'd like to see if this is a reasonable solution, or is just plain terrible.



for(var i=1;i<=100;i++) {

var output = "";



    if(i % 15 == 0) {output = "FizzBuzz"}

    else if(i % 3 == 0) {output = "Fizz"}

    else if(i % 5 == 0) {output = "Buzz"}

    else {output = i;}



console.log(output);

}


The output is correct. It's your standard FizzBuzz output.






javascript beginner fizzbuzz iteration







share|improve this question















migrated from stackoverflow.com 16 hours ago


This question came from our site for professional and enthusiast programmers.











  • 3




    It's hard to give constructive criticism on such a small, simple function. It's a reasonable solution and the only things I could pick out being wrong would be me being extremely picky or a personal preference.
    – George
    15 hours ago








  • 2




    You could go with var output = i; and then remove that final else block.
    – user189829
    15 hours ago














7












7








7


0





I'm sure everyone here knows what FizzBuzz is. I would like constructive criticism for my solution.



I'm a beginner to programming as a whole and this isn't my first solution, but it's what I think is my best solution. I'd like to see if this is a reasonable solution, or is just plain terrible.



for(var i=1;i<=100;i++) {

var output = "";



    if(i % 15 == 0) {output = "FizzBuzz"}

    else if(i % 3 == 0) {output = "Fizz"}

    else if(i % 5 == 0) {output = "Buzz"}

    else {output = i;}



console.log(output);

}


The output is correct. It's your standard FizzBuzz output.






javascript beginner fizzbuzz iteration







share|improve this question















I'm sure everyone here knows what FizzBuzz is. I would like constructive criticism for my solution.



I'm a beginner to programming as a whole and this isn't my first solution, but it's what I think is my best solution. I'd like to see if this is a reasonable solution, or is just plain terrible.



for(var i=1;i<=100;i++) {

var output = "";



    if(i % 15 == 0) {output = "FizzBuzz"}

    else if(i % 3 == 0) {output = "Fizz"}

    else if(i % 5 == 0) {output = "Buzz"}

    else {output = i;}



console.log(output);

}


The output is correct. It's your standard FizzBuzz output.






javascript beginner fizzbuzz iteration




javascript beginner fizzbuzz iteration






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 14 hours ago









Sᴀᴍ Onᴇᴌᴀ

8,60961855




8,60961855










asked 16 hours ago









Zachary WoodsZachary Woods

392




392




migrated from stackoverflow.com 16 hours ago


This question came from our site for professional and enthusiast programmers.






migrated from stackoverflow.com 16 hours ago


This question came from our site for professional and enthusiast programmers.










  • 3




    It's hard to give constructive criticism on such a small, simple function. It's a reasonable solution and the only things I could pick out being wrong would be me being extremely picky or a personal preference.
    – George
    15 hours ago








  • 2




    You could go with var output = i; and then remove that final else block.
    – user189829
    15 hours ago














  • 3




    It's hard to give constructive criticism on such a small, simple function. It's a reasonable solution and the only things I could pick out being wrong would be me being extremely picky or a personal preference.
    – George
    15 hours ago








  • 2




    You could go with var output = i; and then remove that final else block.
    – user189829
    15 hours ago








3




3




It's hard to give constructive criticism on such a small, simple function. It's a reasonable solution and the only things I could pick out being wrong would be me being extremely picky or a personal preference.
– George
15 hours ago






It's hard to give constructive criticism on such a small, simple function. It's a reasonable solution and the only things I could pick out being wrong would be me being extremely picky or a personal preference.
– George
15 hours ago






2




2




You could go with var output = i; and then remove that final else block.
– user189829
15 hours ago




You could go with var output = i; and then remove that final else block.
– user189829
15 hours ago










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















17















I'd like to see if this is a reasonable solution, or is just plain terrible.




I wouldn't say it is "terrible" - mostly because it works and doesn't appear to be very inefficient. However, there are some improvements that can be made.





  • use strict equality comparison - i.e. === when comparing values. That way it won't need to convert the types.


  • Style Guide Consider following a style guide. Many common style guides advise separating keywords with a space - e.g. if ( instead of if(.


  • Use consistent indentation The first and last lines within the for loop are not indented, while the other lines between them are, though maybe it was the case that your code was indented properly but when you pasted here it was thrown off because of the markdown formatting...


  • Statements and blocks - If you are going to use block statements then expand them so each statement is on a separate line. Otherwise, just put the single statement without a block. Also use consistent statement termination. The first three conditional blocks don't have a semi-colon after the statement within the block, while the last one (in the else block) does.


  • Consider default value output is never left as "" because it is always set in one of the if, else if or else blocks. The else could be eliminated if output is assigned to i. In a strongly typed language this might have ramifications but not in JavaScript.


  • Abstract logic into a function As Paul's answer suggests: you can put the core logic into a function that returns the output but doesn't handle outputting the value (e.g. to the console). This allows such code to be atomic and testable - congruent with the Single Responsibility Principle. Also, the return statement can eliminate the need for else keywords within a function.


Updated Code



Consider the modified code below, utilizing the feedback above.



Note: the inline console in the snippets is truncated to ~50 lines, but the complete console log should be visible in your browser console.






function fizzBuzz(value) {

    if (value % 15 === 0) return "FizzBuzz";

    if (value % 3 === 0) return "Fizz";

    if (value % 5 === 0) return "Buzz";

    return value;

}

for (var i = 1; i <= 100; i++) {

    console.log(fizzBuzz(i));

}








share|improve this answer



















  • 1




    The cost of using string concatenation is much higher than the cost of an extra modulo operation. If you comment out the relatively slow console.log operation, you'll see the first version is significantly faster.
    – CaseyB
    9 hours ago










  • There is also the "never use semicolons" school. blog.izs.me/2010/12/… feross.org/never-use-semicolons
    – Džuris
    9 hours ago






  • 1




    Regarding style, it is recommended to 1. always add space after a keyword, e.g. if (. Be consistent with for ( 2. (subjective) else if could be just if because we have early returns everywhere. If you remove else, you can remove all else for the sake of consistency. 3. var should never be declared inside for. This is javascript and vars are hoisted. If you cannot use let, declare var at the start of the block because that's what var actually means.
    – Sulthan
    9 hours ago












  • @Sulthan thanks for the feedback. I have updated my answer. I would suggest you mention the part about var within a for loop in an answer of your own - especially if you are working towards the sprortsmanship badge and have upvoted this answer.
    – Sᴀᴍ Onᴇᴌᴀ
    8 hours ago








  • 1




    I disagree with you on the blocks. Each one is a single line; spreading them out doesn't improve readability. It just makes the code longer, which actually hurts readability a tiny bit. The function seems entirely unnecessary, as well.
    – jpmc26
    8 hours ago





















14














I think it's fine as is, though some folks like to return early instead of using a series of if..else. For example:



function calc(i) {

  if(i % 15 == 0) return "FizzBuzz";

  if(i % 3 == 0) return "Fizz";

  if(i % 5 == 0) return "Buzz";

  return i;

}



for(var i=1;i<=100;i++) {

  console.log(calc(i));

}





share|improve this answer























    Your Answer





    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
    return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
    StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
    StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["\$", "\$"]]);
    });
    });
    }, "mathjax-editing");

    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
    StackExchange.snippets.init();
    });
    });
    }, "code-snippets");

    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    var channelOptions = {
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "196"
    };
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
    createEditor();
    });
    }
    else {
    createEditor();
    }
    });

    function createEditor() {
    StackExchange.prepareEditor({
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: false,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: null,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader: {
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    },
    onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    });


    }
    });














    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fcodereview.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f211113%2fhows-my-fizzbuzz-solution-for-a-beginner%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes








    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    17















    I'd like to see if this is a reasonable solution, or is just plain terrible.




    I wouldn't say it is "terrible" - mostly because it works and doesn't appear to be very inefficient. However, there are some improvements that can be made.





    • use strict equality comparison - i.e. === when comparing values. That way it won't need to convert the types.


    • Style Guide Consider following a style guide. Many common style guides advise separating keywords with a space - e.g. if ( instead of if(.


    • Use consistent indentation The first and last lines within the for loop are not indented, while the other lines between them are, though maybe it was the case that your code was indented properly but when you pasted here it was thrown off because of the markdown formatting...


    • Statements and blocks - If you are going to use block statements then expand them so each statement is on a separate line. Otherwise, just put the single statement without a block. Also use consistent statement termination. The first three conditional blocks don't have a semi-colon after the statement within the block, while the last one (in the else block) does.


    • Consider default value output is never left as "" because it is always set in one of the if, else if or else blocks. The else could be eliminated if output is assigned to i. In a strongly typed language this might have ramifications but not in JavaScript.


    • Abstract logic into a function As Paul's answer suggests: you can put the core logic into a function that returns the output but doesn't handle outputting the value (e.g. to the console). This allows such code to be atomic and testable - congruent with the Single Responsibility Principle. Also, the return statement can eliminate the need for else keywords within a function.


    Updated Code



    Consider the modified code below, utilizing the feedback above.



    Note: the inline console in the snippets is truncated to ~50 lines, but the complete console log should be visible in your browser console.






    function fizzBuzz(value) {
    
    if (value % 15 === 0) return "FizzBuzz";
    
    if (value % 3 === 0) return "Fizz";
    
    if (value % 5 === 0) return "Buzz";
    
    return value;
    
}
    
for (var i = 1; i <= 100; i++) {
    
    console.log(fizzBuzz(i));
    
}








    share|improve this answer



















    • 1




      The cost of using string concatenation is much higher than the cost of an extra modulo operation. If you comment out the relatively slow console.log operation, you'll see the first version is significantly faster.
      – CaseyB
      9 hours ago










    • There is also the "never use semicolons" school. blog.izs.me/2010/12/… feross.org/never-use-semicolons
      – Džuris
      9 hours ago






    • 1




      Regarding style, it is recommended to 1. always add space after a keyword, e.g. if (. Be consistent with for ( 2. (subjective) else if could be just if because we have early returns everywhere. If you remove else, you can remove all else for the sake of consistency. 3. var should never be declared inside for. This is javascript and vars are hoisted. If you cannot use let, declare var at the start of the block because that's what var actually means.
      – Sulthan
      9 hours ago












    • @Sulthan thanks for the feedback. I have updated my answer. I would suggest you mention the part about var within a for loop in an answer of your own - especially if you are working towards the sprortsmanship badge and have upvoted this answer.
      – Sᴀᴍ Onᴇᴌᴀ
      8 hours ago








    • 1




      I disagree with you on the blocks. Each one is a single line; spreading them out doesn't improve readability. It just makes the code longer, which actually hurts readability a tiny bit. The function seems entirely unnecessary, as well.
      – jpmc26
      8 hours ago


















    17















    I'd like to see if this is a reasonable solution, or is just plain terrible.




    I wouldn't say it is "terrible" - mostly because it works and doesn't appear to be very inefficient. However, there are some improvements that can be made.





    • use strict equality comparison - i.e. === when comparing values. That way it won't need to convert the types.


    • Style Guide Consider following a style guide. Many common style guides advise separating keywords with a space - e.g. if ( instead of if(.


    • Use consistent indentation The first and last lines within the for loop are not indented, while the other lines between them are, though maybe it was the case that your code was indented properly but when you pasted here it was thrown off because of the markdown formatting...


    • Statements and blocks - If you are going to use block statements then expand them so each statement is on a separate line. Otherwise, just put the single statement without a block. Also use consistent statement termination. The first three conditional blocks don't have a semi-colon after the statement within the block, while the last one (in the else block) does.


    • Consider default value output is never left as "" because it is always set in one of the if, else if or else blocks. The else could be eliminated if output is assigned to i. In a strongly typed language this might have ramifications but not in JavaScript.


    • Abstract logic into a function As Paul's answer suggests: you can put the core logic into a function that returns the output but doesn't handle outputting the value (e.g. to the console). This allows such code to be atomic and testable - congruent with the Single Responsibility Principle. Also, the return statement can eliminate the need for else keywords within a function.


    Updated Code



    Consider the modified code below, utilizing the feedback above.



    Note: the inline console in the snippets is truncated to ~50 lines, but the complete console log should be visible in your browser console.






    function fizzBuzz(value) {
    
    if (value % 15 === 0) return "FizzBuzz";
    
    if (value % 3 === 0) return "Fizz";
    
    if (value % 5 === 0) return "Buzz";
    
    return value;
    
}
    
for (var i = 1; i <= 100; i++) {
    
    console.log(fizzBuzz(i));
    
}








    share|improve this answer



















    • 1




      The cost of using string concatenation is much higher than the cost of an extra modulo operation. If you comment out the relatively slow console.log operation, you'll see the first version is significantly faster.
      – CaseyB
      9 hours ago










    • There is also the "never use semicolons" school. blog.izs.me/2010/12/… feross.org/never-use-semicolons
      – Džuris
      9 hours ago






    • 1




      Regarding style, it is recommended to 1. always add space after a keyword, e.g. if (. Be consistent with for ( 2. (subjective) else if could be just if because we have early returns everywhere. If you remove else, you can remove all else for the sake of consistency. 3. var should never be declared inside for. This is javascript and vars are hoisted. If you cannot use let, declare var at the start of the block because that's what var actually means.
      – Sulthan
      9 hours ago












    • @Sulthan thanks for the feedback. I have updated my answer. I would suggest you mention the part about var within a for loop in an answer of your own - especially if you are working towards the sprortsmanship badge and have upvoted this answer.
      – Sᴀᴍ Onᴇᴌᴀ
      8 hours ago








    • 1




      I disagree with you on the blocks. Each one is a single line; spreading them out doesn't improve readability. It just makes the code longer, which actually hurts readability a tiny bit. The function seems entirely unnecessary, as well.
      – jpmc26
      8 hours ago
















    17












    17








    17







    I'd like to see if this is a reasonable solution, or is just plain terrible.




    I wouldn't say it is "terrible" - mostly because it works and doesn't appear to be very inefficient. However, there are some improvements that can be made.





    • use strict equality comparison - i.e. === when comparing values. That way it won't need to convert the types.


    • Style Guide Consider following a style guide. Many common style guides advise separating keywords with a space - e.g. if ( instead of if(.


    • Use consistent indentation The first and last lines within the for loop are not indented, while the other lines between them are, though maybe it was the case that your code was indented properly but when you pasted here it was thrown off because of the markdown formatting...


    • Statements and blocks - If you are going to use block statements then expand them so each statement is on a separate line. Otherwise, just put the single statement without a block. Also use consistent statement termination. The first three conditional blocks don't have a semi-colon after the statement within the block, while the last one (in the else block) does.


    • Consider default value output is never left as "" because it is always set in one of the if, else if or else blocks. The else could be eliminated if output is assigned to i. In a strongly typed language this might have ramifications but not in JavaScript.


    • Abstract logic into a function As Paul's answer suggests: you can put the core logic into a function that returns the output but doesn't handle outputting the value (e.g. to the console). This allows such code to be atomic and testable - congruent with the Single Responsibility Principle. Also, the return statement can eliminate the need for else keywords within a function.


    Updated Code



    Consider the modified code below, utilizing the feedback above.



    Note: the inline console in the snippets is truncated to ~50 lines, but the complete console log should be visible in your browser console.






    function fizzBuzz(value) {
    
    if (value % 15 === 0) return "FizzBuzz";
    
    if (value % 3 === 0) return "Fizz";
    
    if (value % 5 === 0) return "Buzz";
    
    return value;
    
}
    
for (var i = 1; i <= 100; i++) {
    
    console.log(fizzBuzz(i));
    
}








    share|improve this answer















    I'd like to see if this is a reasonable solution, or is just plain terrible.




    I wouldn't say it is "terrible" - mostly because it works and doesn't appear to be very inefficient. However, there are some improvements that can be made.





    • use strict equality comparison - i.e. === when comparing values. That way it won't need to convert the types.


    • Style Guide Consider following a style guide. Many common style guides advise separating keywords with a space - e.g. if ( instead of if(.


    • Use consistent indentation The first and last lines within the for loop are not indented, while the other lines between them are, though maybe it was the case that your code was indented properly but when you pasted here it was thrown off because of the markdown formatting...


    • Statements and blocks - If you are going to use block statements then expand them so each statement is on a separate line. Otherwise, just put the single statement without a block. Also use consistent statement termination. The first three conditional blocks don't have a semi-colon after the statement within the block, while the last one (in the else block) does.


    • Consider default value output is never left as "" because it is always set in one of the if, else if or else blocks. The else could be eliminated if output is assigned to i. In a strongly typed language this might have ramifications but not in JavaScript.


    • Abstract logic into a function As Paul's answer suggests: you can put the core logic into a function that returns the output but doesn't handle outputting the value (e.g. to the console). This allows such code to be atomic and testable - congruent with the Single Responsibility Principle. Also, the return statement can eliminate the need for else keywords within a function.


    Updated Code



    Consider the modified code below, utilizing the feedback above.



    Note: the inline console in the snippets is truncated to ~50 lines, but the complete console log should be visible in your browser console.






    function fizzBuzz(value) {
    
    if (value % 15 === 0) return "FizzBuzz";
    
    if (value % 3 === 0) return "Fizz";
    
    if (value % 5 === 0) return "Buzz";
    
    return value;
    
}
    
for (var i = 1; i <= 100; i++) {
    
    console.log(fizzBuzz(i));
    
}








    function fizzBuzz(value) {
    
    if (value % 15 === 0) return "FizzBuzz";
    
    if (value % 3 === 0) return "Fizz";
    
    if (value % 5 === 0) return "Buzz";
    
    return value;
    
}
    
for (var i = 1; i <= 100; i++) {
    
    console.log(fizzBuzz(i));
    
}





    function fizzBuzz(value) {
    
    if (value % 15 === 0) return "FizzBuzz";
    
    if (value % 3 === 0) return "Fizz";
    
    if (value % 5 === 0) return "Buzz";
    
    return value;
    
}
    
for (var i = 1; i <= 100; i++) {
    
    console.log(fizzBuzz(i));
    
}






    share|improve this answer














    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer








    edited 7 hours ago

























    answered 14 hours ago









    Sᴀᴍ OnᴇᴌᴀSᴀᴍ Onᴇᴌᴀ

    8,60961855




    8,60961855








    • 1




      The cost of using string concatenation is much higher than the cost of an extra modulo operation. If you comment out the relatively slow console.log operation, you'll see the first version is significantly faster.
      – CaseyB
      9 hours ago










    • There is also the "never use semicolons" school. blog.izs.me/2010/12/… feross.org/never-use-semicolons
      – Džuris
      9 hours ago






    • 1




      Regarding style, it is recommended to 1. always add space after a keyword, e.g. if (. Be consistent with for ( 2. (subjective) else if could be just if because we have early returns everywhere. If you remove else, you can remove all else for the sake of consistency. 3. var should never be declared inside for. This is javascript and vars are hoisted. If you cannot use let, declare var at the start of the block because that's what var actually means.
      – Sulthan
      9 hours ago












    • @Sulthan thanks for the feedback. I have updated my answer. I would suggest you mention the part about var within a for loop in an answer of your own - especially if you are working towards the sprortsmanship badge and have upvoted this answer.
      – Sᴀᴍ Onᴇᴌᴀ
      8 hours ago








    • 1




      I disagree with you on the blocks. Each one is a single line; spreading them out doesn't improve readability. It just makes the code longer, which actually hurts readability a tiny bit. The function seems entirely unnecessary, as well.
      – jpmc26
      8 hours ago
















    • 1




      The cost of using string concatenation is much higher than the cost of an extra modulo operation. If you comment out the relatively slow console.log operation, you'll see the first version is significantly faster.
      – CaseyB
      9 hours ago










    • There is also the "never use semicolons" school. blog.izs.me/2010/12/… feross.org/never-use-semicolons
      – Džuris
      9 hours ago






    • 1




      Regarding style, it is recommended to 1. always add space after a keyword, e.g. if (. Be consistent with for ( 2. (subjective) else if could be just if because we have early returns everywhere. If you remove else, you can remove all else for the sake of consistency. 3. var should never be declared inside for. This is javascript and vars are hoisted. If you cannot use let, declare var at the start of the block because that's what var actually means.
      – Sulthan
      9 hours ago












    • @Sulthan thanks for the feedback. I have updated my answer. I would suggest you mention the part about var within a for loop in an answer of your own - especially if you are working towards the sprortsmanship badge and have upvoted this answer.
      – Sᴀᴍ Onᴇᴌᴀ
      8 hours ago








    • 1




      I disagree with you on the blocks. Each one is a single line; spreading them out doesn't improve readability. It just makes the code longer, which actually hurts readability a tiny bit. The function seems entirely unnecessary, as well.
      – jpmc26
      8 hours ago










    1




    1




    The cost of using string concatenation is much higher than the cost of an extra modulo operation. If you comment out the relatively slow console.log operation, you'll see the first version is significantly faster.
    – CaseyB
    9 hours ago




    The cost of using string concatenation is much higher than the cost of an extra modulo operation. If you comment out the relatively slow console.log operation, you'll see the first version is significantly faster.
    – CaseyB
    9 hours ago












    There is also the "never use semicolons" school. blog.izs.me/2010/12/… feross.org/never-use-semicolons
    – Džuris
    9 hours ago




    There is also the "never use semicolons" school. blog.izs.me/2010/12/… feross.org/never-use-semicolons
    – Džuris
    9 hours ago




    1




    1




    Regarding style, it is recommended to 1. always add space after a keyword, e.g. if (. Be consistent with for ( 2. (subjective) else if could be just if because we have early returns everywhere. If you remove else, you can remove all else for the sake of consistency. 3. var should never be declared inside for. This is javascript and vars are hoisted. If you cannot use let, declare var at the start of the block because that's what var actually means.
    – Sulthan
    9 hours ago






    Regarding style, it is recommended to 1. always add space after a keyword, e.g. if (. Be consistent with for ( 2. (subjective) else if could be just if because we have early returns everywhere. If you remove else, you can remove all else for the sake of consistency. 3. var should never be declared inside for. This is javascript and vars are hoisted. If you cannot use let, declare var at the start of the block because that's what var actually means.
    – Sulthan
    9 hours ago














    @Sulthan thanks for the feedback. I have updated my answer. I would suggest you mention the part about var within a for loop in an answer of your own - especially if you are working towards the sprortsmanship badge and have upvoted this answer.
    – Sᴀᴍ Onᴇᴌᴀ
    8 hours ago






    @Sulthan thanks for the feedback. I have updated my answer. I would suggest you mention the part about var within a for loop in an answer of your own - especially if you are working towards the sprortsmanship badge and have upvoted this answer.
    – Sᴀᴍ Onᴇᴌᴀ
    8 hours ago






    1




    1




    I disagree with you on the blocks. Each one is a single line; spreading them out doesn't improve readability. It just makes the code longer, which actually hurts readability a tiny bit. The function seems entirely unnecessary, as well.
    – jpmc26
    8 hours ago






    I disagree with you on the blocks. Each one is a single line; spreading them out doesn't improve readability. It just makes the code longer, which actually hurts readability a tiny bit. The function seems entirely unnecessary, as well.
    – jpmc26
    8 hours ago















    14














    I think it's fine as is, though some folks like to return early instead of using a series of if..else. For example:



    function calc(i) {
    
  if(i % 15 == 0) return "FizzBuzz";
    
  if(i % 3 == 0) return "Fizz";
    
  if(i % 5 == 0) return "Buzz";
    
  return i;
    
}
    

    
for(var i=1;i<=100;i++) {
    
  console.log(calc(i));
    
}





    share|improve this answer




























      14














      I think it's fine as is, though some folks like to return early instead of using a series of if..else. For example:



      function calc(i) {
      
  if(i % 15 == 0) return "FizzBuzz";
      
  if(i % 3 == 0) return "Fizz";
      
  if(i % 5 == 0) return "Buzz";
      
  return i;
      
}
      

      
for(var i=1;i<=100;i++) {
      
  console.log(calc(i));
      
}





      share|improve this answer


























        14












        14








        14






        I think it's fine as is, though some folks like to return early instead of using a series of if..else. For example:



        function calc(i) {
        
  if(i % 15 == 0) return "FizzBuzz";
        
  if(i % 3 == 0) return "Fizz";
        
  if(i % 5 == 0) return "Buzz";
        
  return i;
        
}
        

        
for(var i=1;i<=100;i++) {
        
  console.log(calc(i));
        
}





        share|improve this answer














        I think it's fine as is, though some folks like to return early instead of using a series of if..else. For example:



        function calc(i) {
        
  if(i % 15 == 0) return "FizzBuzz";
        
  if(i % 3 == 0) return "Fizz";
        
  if(i % 5 == 0) return "Buzz";
        
  return i;
        
}
        

        
for(var i=1;i<=100;i++) {
        
  console.log(calc(i));
        
}






        share|improve this answer














        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer








        edited 15 hours ago

























        answered 15 hours ago









        PaulPaul

        29115




        29115






























            draft saved

            draft discarded




















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Code Review Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid …



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





            Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


            Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid …



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fcodereview.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f211113%2fhows-my-fizzbuzz-solution-for-a-beginner%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            -

            Popular posts from this blog

            Single-Malt-Whisky

            Image
            Fünf verschiedene schottische Single-Malt-Whiskys Als Single-Malt-Whisky oder kürzer Single Malt werden Whiskys bezeichnet, die zwei besondere Bedingungen erfüllen: Sie stammen zum ersten aus einer einzigen Brennerei, sind also kein Verschnitt aus mehreren Whiskysorten (daher Single , deutsch: einzeln). Zum zweiten wird als Getreide ausschließlich gemälzte Gerste verwendet (deswegen Malt , deutsch: Malz). Der Zusatz Single Malt wird als Prädikat verstanden, die so ausgezeichneten Whiskys sind in aller Regel besonders hochwertig. Hinzu kommt ihre besonders lange Lagerung, die Reifungszeit währt oft ein Jahrzehnt und länger. Inhaltsverzeichnis 1 Allgemeines 2 Herkunftsländer 2.1 Schottland 2.2 Irland 2.3 Japan 2.4 Kontinentaleuropa 3 Produktionsschritte 3.1 Mälzen 3.2 Brauen 3.3 Brennen 3.4 Reifung und Finish 3.5 Abfüllung 4 Altersangaben 5 Lagerung von Whiskyflaschen 6 Geschmacksklassifikation 7 Sonstig
            Read more

            Liste der Baudenkmale in Friedland (Mecklenburg)

            Image
            In der Liste der Baudenkmale in Friedland sind alle denkmalgeschützten Bauten der Stadt Friedland (Mecklenburg-Vorpommern) und ihrer Ortsteile aufgelistet. Grundlage ist die Veröffentlichung der Denkmalliste des Landkreises Mecklenburgische Seenplatte (Auszug) vom 28. September 2016. Inhaltsverzeichnis 1 Baudenkmale nach Ortsteilen 1.1 Friedland 1.2 Bresewitz 1.3 Brohm 1.4 Cosa 1.5 Dishley 1.6 Dishley-Ausbau 1.7 Eichhorst 1.8 Glienke 1.9 Heinrichshöh 1.10 Heinrichswalde 1.11 Jatzke 1.12 Jatzke-Meierei 1.13 Liepen 1.14 Ramelow 1.15 Schwanbeck 2 Vorgesehener Denkmalbereich 3 Quelle 4 Weblinks Baudenkmale nach Ortsteilen | Friedland | ID Lage Bezeichnung Beschreibung Bild 281 An der Kleinbahn 2 Windmühle mit Umgang 282 Anklamer Straße alter Friedhof mit Portalwand 282 Anklamer Straße drei Erbbegräbnissen und Gräbern u. a. H.A. Riemann 284
            Read more

            Czorneboh

            Image
            Dieser Artikel erläutert den Berg Czorneboh, für die Gottheit siehe Czorneboh (Gottheit). Czorneboh Čornobóh Berggasthof mit Turm Höhe 555,7  m ü. NHN [1] Lage Freistaat Sachsen, Deutschland Gebirge Lausitzer Bergland Dominanz 15,4 km →  Kottmar Koordinaten 51° 7′ 11″  N , 14° 31′ 31″  O 51.119722222222 14.525194444444 555.7 Koordinaten: 51° 7′ 11″  N , 14° 31′ 31″  O Gestein Granodiorit Besonderheiten Aussichtsturm Czorneboh Der Czorneboh , obersorbisch Čornobóh , ist ein Berg zwischen Hochkirch und Cunewalde in der Oberlausitz. Er gehört zu der südöstlich von Bautzen gelegenen Czorneboh-Bergkette und ist mit einer Höhe von 555,7  m ü. NHN [1] der höchste Punkt dieses Ausläufers des Lausitzer Berglandes. Er leitet als Landschaftselement die wellige Granitlandschaft der Lausitzer Vorbergzone ein. Der Gipfel des Czorneboh liegt in der Gemarkung Meschwitz (Gemeinde Hochkirch), die Czornebohbaude jedoch
            Read more