His question was "Kinda lost in the .filter.call , etc part."
uniqueInOrder returns a distinct list of array for an order array with duplicate values.
Given an array [1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3], uniqueInOrder returns [1, 2, 3].
But couldn't you have just used Array#filter?
Yes it works but .filter.call can handle objects not derived from Array.
Some objects are iterable and not derived from Array. Refer to this, How I learned to Stop Looping and Love the Iterator post by Kushan for details.
filter is defined by Array prototype thus an object calling "filter" should implement an Array prototype. But NodeList doesn't implement Array prototype, so you can't call filter on it even though it's iterable.
.filter.call lets you use the filter method without having to convert non-Array sequences into an array. Therefore making "uniqueInOrder" method more generic.
Here is an example.
document.querySelectorAll('a') returns an object of type NodeList.
When you try to call filter directly, it fails.
You can get around it by using a spread syntax.
And .filter.call works as well.
document queryselctorall example document queryselctorall example
If you use C#, you might have run into IEnumerable<T>. It's an interface, which enables implementing class to be iterable.
Let's see two methods that accepts an iterable object of type string and prints each element.
If you were to pass wordArray to ListPrintWords, it will fail to compile while GenericPrintWords is happy to work with it.
So .filter.call can be used to deal with any iterable objects that do not inherit Array prototypes.
And it's roughly equivalent to dealing with objects implementing IEnumerable<T> interface in .NET, thus enabling methods accept any kind of generic iterable sequences.
I've had hard time understanding the WHY of such a method initially. I am able to see more when I make analogies to languages I am used to (C#).
I'd love your feedback/errata. So leave a comment below or send me a twit :)