Benchmark: reduce vs foreach with destructuring

Script Preparation code:

var data = [];
for (var iterator = 0; iterator < 1000; iterator++) {
	data.push({id: iterator, name: 'Iteration ' + iterator});
}

Tests:

Reduce
var flattened = data.reduce((entities, item) => { return { ...entities, [item.id]: item } }, {}); console.log(flattened);
Foreach
var flattened = {}; data.forEach((item) => { flattened[item.id] = item; }); console.log(flattened);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Reduce
Foreach

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/121.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 121 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Reduce	6410.7 Ops/sec
Foreach	73285.0 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

**What is being tested?**

The provided JSON represents two JavaScript microbenchmarks, each comparing different approaches to flatten an array of objects. The tests are:

1. `reduce`: This test uses the `Array.prototype.reduce()` method to flatten the array of objects.
2. `Foreach` (note: this should be "forEach" instead): This test uses a traditional `for...of` loop with `forEach()` to achieve the same result.

**Options compared**

The options being compared are:

* `reduce`: Using `Array.prototype.reduce()` method to flatten the array of objects.
* `Foreach`: Using a traditional `for...of` loop with `forEach()` to flatten the array of objects.

**Pros and Cons**

1. **Reduce**:
	* Pros: Can be more concise and expressive, especially when working with complex data structures.
	* Cons: Can be slower and less intuitive for some developers, especially those new to JavaScript.
2. **Foreach**:
	* Pros: Can be more readable and easier to understand, especially for those familiar with traditional loops.
	* Cons: Can lead to more verbose code and is less concise than `reduce`.

**Other considerations**

In general, when working with arrays of objects, `reduce` can be a good choice because it allows you to focus on the logic of transformation without worrying about the iteration. However, for simpler cases or when readability is crucial, `forEach` might be a better option.

It's also worth noting that both approaches have their strengths and weaknesses depending on the specific use case. For example, if you need to perform multiple transformations on each object in the array, `reduce` can be more suitable. On the other hand, if you only need to perform a simple operation like assignment, `forEach` might be enough.

**Library usage**

In this case, there is no explicit library mentioned. However, it's worth noting that both `Array.prototype.reduce()` and `Array.prototype.forEach()` are built-in methods in JavaScript and don't require any external libraries.

**Special JS feature or syntax**

There is no special JavaScript feature or syntax being used in these tests. The only notable aspect is the use of template literals for string interpolation (`\r\n` becomes `\n`, etc.), which is a standard feature in modern JavaScript.

Related benchmarks:

reduce vs foreach with destructuring (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Reduce vs Foreach

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Reduce

Foreach

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):