Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Ramda Range
(version: 0)
range
Comparing performance of:
test vs test2
Created:
5 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
HTML Preparation code:
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/ramda/0.25.0/ramda.min.js"></script>
Tests:
test
R.range(100000)
test2
[1,2,3].map(y => R.range(1000))
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
test
test2
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
No previous run results
This benchmark does not have any results yet. Be the first one
to run it!
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
Let's break down the provided benchmark JSON and explain what's being tested. **Benchmark Definition** The provided benchmark definition is for Ramda, a functional programming library for JavaScript. The two test cases are: 1. `R.range(100000)` - This tests the range function in Ramda, which generates an array of numbers from 0 to 99,999. 2. `[1,2,3].map(y => R.range(1000))` - This tests a more complex scenario where an array is mapped over and each element is converted to use the `range` function. **Options Compared** In this benchmark, two options are being compared: 1. **Single Function Call**: The first test case, `R.range(100000)`, tests calling the `range` function directly. 2. **Function Composition**: The second test case, `[1,2,3].map(y => R.range(1000))`, tests using a more complex approach where an array is mapped over and each element is converted to use the `range` function. **Pros and Cons** The choice between these two approaches depends on the specific requirements of your application: * **Single Function Call**: Pros: + More straightforward and easier to understand. + Can be faster since it only involves a single function call. + Less memory allocation is required. * **Function Composition**: Pros: + Allows for more flexibility and modularity in code. + Can lead to more efficient use of resources, as the `range` function is only called once for each element. + Can be easier to maintain and extend complex logic. However, the cons are: * More complex and harder to understand. * May require additional memory allocation due to the creation of temporary arrays or objects. **Library: Ramda** Ramda is a functional programming library that provides a set of higher-order functions for manipulating data. The `range` function in Ramda generates an array of numbers from a start value up to a specified end value (exclusive). In this benchmark, Ramda's `range` function is used to generate arrays of numbers. This allows the user to easily test and optimize performance-critical code that involves numerical computations. **Special JavaScript Feature/ Syntax** There are no special JavaScript features or syntax mentioned in the provided benchmark definition. However, it does use modern JavaScript features like arrow functions (`=>`) and template literals (`\r\n`). If you're interested in exploring other alternatives for this type of benchmarking, here are some options: * **Benchmarking frameworks**: Tools like BenchmarkJS, Microbenchmark, or fastbench.js provide a more structured approach to benchmarking code performance. * **Native JavaScript APIs**: For performance-critical numerical computations, native JavaScript APIs like `Math.floor`, `Math.round`, and `Array.prototype.forEach` can be used as alternatives to Ramda's `range` function.
Related benchmarks:
ramda includes vs native
Lodash vs Ramda fromPairs
Ramda vs vanilla JS
Ramda range vs Array.from
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?