Benchmark: BM | For + Push vs Map

Tests:

Run with For + Array.push
const dataset = [ { id: 1, name: 'A' }, { id: 2, name: 'B' }, { id: 3, name: 'C' }, { id: 4, name: 'D' }, { id: 5, name: 'E' }, { id: 6, name: 'F' }, { id: 7, name: 'G' }, { id: 8, name: 'H' }, { id: 9, name: 'I' }, { id: 10, name: 'J' }, ] const list = [] for (let i = 0; i < dataset.length; i++) { list.push({ id: dataset[i].id, name: dataset[i].name, increment: i }) }
Run with Map
const dataset = [ { id: 1, name: 'A' }, { id: 2, name: 'B' }, { id: 3, name: 'C' }, { id: 4, name: 'D' }, { id: 5, name: 'E' }, { id: 6, name: 'F' }, { id: 7, name: 'G' }, { id: 8, name: 'H' }, { id: 9, name: 'I' }, { id: 10, name: 'J' }, ] const list = dataset.map((d, i) => ({ id: d.id, name: d.name, increment: i }))

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Run with For + Array.push
Run with Map

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.

**Overview**

The provided JSON represents a benchmark test case on MeasureThat.net, which compares the performance of two approaches: using a `for` loop and `Array.push()` versus using the `map()` method to iterate over an array in JavaScript.

**Test Case Comparison**

There are two test cases:

1. **Run with For + Array.push**: This test case uses a traditional `for` loop to iterate over the dataset array, pushing each element onto a separate array using `Array.push()`.
2. **Run with Map**: This test case uses the `map()` method to create a new array from the original dataset, applying an arrow function to transform each element.

**Options Compared**

The two approaches being compared are:

* Using a `for` loop and `Array.push()` (Test Case 1)
* Using the `map()` method (Test Case 2)

**Pros and Cons**

### For Loop and Array.push()

Pros:

* Easy to understand and implement
* Allows for control over the iteration process

Cons:

* Can be slower due to the overhead of repeated function calls and array indexing
* May lead to performance issues if not optimized correctly

### Map()

Pros:

* More concise and expressive than using a `for` loop
* Often faster because it avoids the overhead of repeated function calls and array indexing

Cons:

* Less control over the iteration process
* Can be less readable for complex transformations

**Other Considerations**

When choosing between these two approaches, consider the following factors:

* Performance: If speed is critical, `map()` might be a better choice.
* Readability: If code readability is more important, using a `for` loop and `Array.push()` might be a better option.
* Complexity: If the transformation is simple, `map()` can make the code more concise. For complex transformations, a `for` loop and `Array.push()` might be more suitable.

**Library Usage**

There is no explicit library usage in these test cases, but the `map()` method relies on the native JavaScript `Array.prototype.map()` function.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

No special JavaScript features or syntax are used in these test cases. The focus is on comparing two common programming approaches in JavaScript.

**Alternatives**

If you need to compare other approaches for iterating over arrays, consider using:

* `forEach()`: A similar method to `map()` but without returning a new array.
* `reduce()`: A method that reduces an array to a single value by applying a function to each element.
* Other libraries or frameworks (e.g., Lodash, Ramda) that provide functional programming utilities.

Related benchmarks:

BM | For + Push vs Map (version: 0)

Benchmark for loop and push items to an array vs map

Comparing performance of: Run with For + Array.push vs Run with Map

Created: 4 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

Run with For + Array.push

Run with Map

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):