Benchmark: loop filter for in if VS filter map

Script Preparation code:

numbers = [];
let _idx = 1000;
while(_idx-- > 0) {
  numbers.push(_idx);
}

let acc = 0;

Tests:

1
acc = 0; for(let i=0; i< numbers.length; i++){ if(numbers%2 === 0) { acc += numbers[i]; } }
2
acc = 0; numbers .filter(n => n%2 === 0) .reduce((acc, cur)=> acc += cur, 0);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
1
2

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):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the benchmark and its options.

The benchmark tests two approaches to filter an array of numbers and calculate the sum of even numbers:

**Approach 1:** Using a traditional `for` loop with an index (`i`) that iterates over the array, checking if each number is even using the modulo operator (`numbers % 2 === 0`). If it's even, the value is added to the accumulator (`acc`).

**Approach 2:** Using the `filter()` method to create a new array with only the even numbers, followed by the `reduce()` method to calculate the sum of these numbers.

Now, let's discuss the pros and cons of each approach:

**Approach 1:**

Pros:

* Simple and straightforward code
* Easy to understand and maintain
* Does not require any additional libraries or dependencies

Cons:

* Inefficient iteration over the array using a traditional `for` loop
* Requires manual index management, which can lead to errors if not done correctly

**Approach 2:**

Pros:

* More concise and expressive code using native JavaScript methods
* Optimized for performance since it uses built-in array methods that are implemented in C++
* Eliminates the need for manual index management

Cons:

* Requires familiarity with `filter()` and `reduce()` methods, which can be a barrier for less experienced developers
* May have higher overhead due to the creation of an intermediate array using `filter()`

**Library:**

In both test cases, no external library is used. However, if we were to use a library like Lodash or Ramda, we could simplify the code further and take advantage of their filtering and reduction functions.

**Special JS feature/syntax:**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax used in this benchmark that would require explanation. The code uses standard JavaScript syntax and does not rely on any experimental or proposed features.

Now, let's discuss other alternatives:

* **Array.prototype.forEach()**: Instead of using a traditional `for` loop, we could use `forEach()` to iterate over the array. However, `forEach()` is not as efficient as using a traditional loop for performance-critical code.
* **Set-based operations**: We could also use set operations like `filter()`, `reduce()`, and `map()` in combination with other methods to optimize the benchmark. For example, we could use `filter()` to create an array of even numbers, then use `reduce()` to calculate their sum.

To further improve the benchmark, the authors of MeasureThat.net might consider adding more test cases, varying the input data (e.g., larger arrays or different distribution), and exploring other optimization techniques like caching or parallelization.

Related benchmarks:

loop filter for in if VS filter map (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: 1 vs 2

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

1

2

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

No previous run results

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