Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
flatMap() vs map().filter() v1
(version: 0)
flatMap vs filter map
Comparing performance of:
map().filter() vs flatMap()
Created:
4 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var arr = []; var i = 0; while (i <= 1E5) arr[i] = i++;
Tests:
map().filter()
arr.map(x => x/10).filter(x => x % 3)
flatMap()
arr.flatMap(x => { const next = x/100; return next % 3 ? [next] : []})
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
map().filter()
flatMap()
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 processing arrays in JavaScript: **Method 1: `map().filter()`** * **Description:** This approach first uses the `map()` method to transform each element in the array by dividing it by 10. Then, it uses the `filter()` method to keep only those elements that are not divisible by 3 when divided by the result of the division by 10. * **Pros:** * Widely understood and commonly used pattern. * Can be easier to read for beginners as it's a more sequential approach. * **Cons:** Can potentially be less efficient than `flatMap()` because it involves two separate array operations. The intermediate array created by `map()` might consume extra memory. **Method 2: `flatMap()`** * **Description:** This approach uses the `flatMap()` method, which combines mapping and filtering into a single operation. It iterates through the array, divides each element by 100, and only includes elements in the resulting array if the result is not divisible by 3. * **Pros:** * More concise and potentially more efficient than `map().filter()`, especially when dealing with large arrays. It avoids creating an intermediate array, reducing memory usage. * **Cons:** * Can be slightly less readable for beginners who are unfamiliar with `flatMap()`. **Libraries Used:** None specifically mentioned in the provided code. **Special JS Features/Syntax:** `map()`, `filter()`, and `flatMap()` are built-in methods in JavaScript for array manipulation. **Alternatives:** * **Manual Iteration:** You could achieve similar results by using a traditional `for` loop to iterate through the array, perform the calculations, and filter elements manually. However, this approach is typically less efficient and more verbose than using higher-order array methods like those tested here. Let me know if you have any other questions!
Related benchmarks:
javascript array.filter().map() vs array.flatMap()
Array flatMap() vs filter().map()
flatMap() vs filter().map() - arrays
flatMap() vs filter().map() Bruno
comparing flatMap vs filter and map in little arr length
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?