Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
lambdas2
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
lambda vs no lambda
Created:
5 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var x = []; for(i=0; i<1000; i++){ x.push(i) }
Tests:
lambda
let y = []; for(i=0; i<1000; i++){ y[i] = (() => x[i])() }
no lambda
let z = []; for(i=0; i<1000; i++){ z[i] = x[i] }
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
lambda
no lambda
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
gemma2:9b
, generated one year ago):
This benchmark compares the performance of two methods for creating an array: using anonymous functions (lambdas) and directly accessing elements from an existing array. Let's break it down: **Test Setup:** * **`Script Preparation Code`**: This code snippet initializes a large array `x` containing numbers from 0 to 999. **Test Cases:** 1. **`lambda`**: This test case iterates through the `x` array and for each index `i`, it creates an anonymous function (a lambda) that returns the value at `x[i]`. Then, this lambda is executed to retrieve the value and stored in a new array `y`. 2. **`no lambda`**: This test case directly accesses the values from the `x` array using the index `i` and stores them in a new array `z`. **Options Compared:** * **Lambdas (anonymous functions):** While concise, they introduce an extra layer of function creation and execution overhead. * **Direct Access:** This approach is more straightforward and avoids the overhead associated with creating and calling anonymous functions. **Pros & Cons:** | Approach | Pros | Cons | |----------|---------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------| | **Lambdas** | More concise syntax | Extra function creation and call overhead | | **Direct Access** | Simpler, faster execution | Less expressive in some scenarios | **Considerations:** * **Context:** The choice between lambdas and direct access depends on the specific use case. If the anonymous function logic is complex, lambdas might be more readable. However, for simple operations like accessing an array element, direct access is usually faster. * **Microbenchmark Limitations:** Keep in mind that microbenchmarks are very specific to the test setup. Real-world performance can vary based on factors like input size, other code running concurrently, and browser/environment. **Alternatives (Not Tested Here):** * Using `map()` for array transformation - This built-in JavaScript method can potentially be more efficient than using lambdas or direct access in some cases.
Related benchmarks:
slice vs destruction
Array assign vs spread operator vs push
push vs apply.push vs spread
Push vs Spread vs Double loop Ultimate
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?