Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Stelian
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
Reduce vs FlatMap
Created:
4 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var arr = Array(10_000).fill(0)
Tests:
Reduce
arr.reduce((acc, x) => {acc.push(x); acc.push(x); return acc}, [])
FlatMap
arr.flatMap(x => [x, x])
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Reduce
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
llama3.1:latest
, generated one year ago):
Let's dive into the benchmarking results. **Benchmark Definition** The provided JSON defines a simple benchmark with two test cases: "Reduce" and "FlatMap". The benchmark tests the performance of these two array methods on a large array (`arr`) created by filling 10,000 elements with zeros. **Test Case 1: Reduce** * **Benchmark Definition**: `arr.reduce((acc, x) => {acc.push(x); acc.push(x); return acc}, [])` * **Library/Language Feature**: None * **Description**: This test case uses the `reduce()` method to iterate over the array. The callback function takes two arguments: `acc` (the accumulator) and `x` (the current element). For each element, it pushes the value twice onto the accumulator array. **Test Case 2: FlatMap** * **Benchmark Definition**: `arr.flatMap(x => [x, x])` * **Library/Language Feature**: None * **Description**: This test case uses the `flatMap()` method to create a new array by iterating over the original array. For each element, it returns an array containing two copies of the element. **Pros/Cons and Considerations** Both test cases are simple examples that can be used to demonstrate the performance differences between two array methods. The results show that "Reduce" is significantly faster than "FlatMap". * **Reduce**: Pros: + Faster execution time (8801.65 executions per second on Chrome 97) + Can be useful when you need to perform some operation on each element and store the result in an accumulator * Cons: + May not be as efficient for large arrays due to the push() method's overhead * **FlatMap**: Pros: + Efficient way to create a new array with transformed values * Cons: + Slower execution time (341.69 executions per second on Chrome 97) + May not be suitable when dealing with very large arrays Other alternatives for these test cases include: * Using `map()` instead of `flatMap()` to achieve similar results, but with a slight performance hit. * Implementing custom iteration logic using loops or recursive functions, which can lead to slower execution times and more code complexity. **Library Usage** There is no external library used in this benchmark. The tests rely solely on built-in JavaScript methods (`reduce()`, `flatMap()`). Overall, the provided JSON serves as a basic example for benchmarking array methods' performance in JavaScript. It's essential to consider these test cases as part of a larger context and take into account specific requirements and constraints when choosing between different array methods.
Related benchmarks:
filling
array last element big data
TypedArray fill vs loop
shallow copy of 6M elements array
Clone Array - 08/02/2024
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?