# Return Largest Numbers in Arrays - code neatness

Return Largest Numbers in Arrays - code neatness
0

#1

Tell us what’s happening:
Hello,

actually, I find out the solution of this assignment. Anyway, I’ve noticed that my solutions are usually different than suggested in “Get a hint” section. Should I be worried? My code works, but those seem to be more “neat”. Is this '‘neatness’ part important in front-end job? Or it’s mostly about finding the solution and problems resolving?

``````function largestOfFour(arr) {
// You can do this!
for (i=0; i<arr.length; i++) {
arr[i] = arr[i].sort(function(a,b) {
return b-a;
});
}

var newArr = [];
for (i=0; i<arr.length; i++) {
newArr.push(arr[i][0]);
}

return newArr;
}

largestOfFour([[4, 5, 1, 3], [13, 27, 18, 26], [32, 35, 37, 39], [1000, 1001, 857, 1]]);
``````

Your Browser User Agent is: `Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_12_6) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/62.0.3202.94 Safari/537.36`.

#2

Don’t worry if you take different paths to the solution for now. I answered a question like this just the other day, and the answer applies to your question too: Chunky Monkey - Very different solution

#3

One thing which would make your solution “neater” is skipping the extra for loop.

``````function largestOfFour(arr) {
// You can do this!
var newArr = []; // initialize newArr before entering for loop
for (i=0; i<arr.length; i++) {
arr[i] = arr[i].sort(function(a,b) {
return b-a;
});
newArr.push(arr[i][0]);  // adding this line avoids the extra for loop
}
return newArr;
}
``````