Benchmark: Ramda map vs Array.map anonymous function

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="//cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/ramda/0.25.0/ramda.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

function double(n) {
	return n*2;
}
var data = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30];

Tests:

Ramda
R.map((n) => n*2, data);
Array (native)
data.map(n => n*2);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Ramda
Array (native)

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.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is designed to measure the speed of two different approaches: Ramda's `map` function and Array's native `map` function with an anonymous function.

**Options Compared**

1. **Ramda's `map` function**: This approach uses the Ramda library, which provides a functional programming style for JavaScript.
2. **Array's native `map` function**: This approach is built into the JavaScript language itself and uses a closure-based approach to iterate over the array.

**Pros and Cons**

* **Ramda's `map` function**:
	+ Pros: Provides a concise and expressive way of transforming data, which can lead to more readable code. Also, Ramda provides additional functionality that can simplify the transformation process.
	+ Cons: Introduces an external dependency (the Ramda library), which may add overhead in terms of loading time. Additionally, some developers might find the functional programming style unfamiliar or less intuitive than traditional JavaScript approaches.
* **Array's native `map` function**:
	+ Pros: No additional dependencies are required, and it's a well-established part of the JavaScript language. This approach is often faster since there's no overhead from loading an external library.
	+ Cons: The code can become longer and more verbose due to the need for explicit callback functions or arrow functions.

**Library: Ramda**

Ramda is a popular functional programming library for JavaScript that provides a set of reusable functions for common data transformation tasks. In this benchmark, Ramda's `map` function is used to double each element in the input array.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax: None**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax used in this benchmark.

**Other Alternatives**

If you wanted to compare other approaches, you might consider:

* Using a different functional programming library (e.g., Lodash)
* Implementing your own `map` function using traditional loops and callbacks
* Using a different data transformation approach, such as reducing arrays or using `forEach`

Keep in mind that the choice of library or implementation can significantly impact performance. In this case, Ramda's `map` function is optimized for performance, but the benchmark also provides a comparison with Array's native `map` function to give users a sense of the overhead introduced by external libraries.

Related benchmarks:

Ramda map vs Array.map anonymous function (version: 0)

measures the speed of ramda's map vs Array's native map

Comparing performance of: Ramda vs Array (native)

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Ramda

Array (native)

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):