Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
flatMap vs reduce (inner object)
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
reduce with concat vs flatMap
Created:
4 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var arr = Array(10_000).fill({ subsections: 0 })
Tests:
reduce with concat
arr.reduce((memo, { subsections }) => [...memo, ...subsections], [])
flatMap
arr.flatMap((x) => x.subsections)
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
reduce with concat
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
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
Let's break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested. **Benchmark Purpose** The benchmark is designed to compare the performance of two JavaScript methods: `flatMap` (a modern method introduced in ECMAScript 2019) and its equivalent using the `reduce` method with concatenation (`reduce with concat`). The test aims to measure which approach is faster for a specific use case. **Options Compared** There are two options being compared: 1. **flatMap**: A modern JavaScript method that flattens an array by applying a callback function to each element, returning an array of the results. 2. **Reduce with concat**: An older method that uses the `reduce` method with concatenation (`...memo, ...subsections`) to achieve a similar result. **Pros and Cons** Here are some pros and cons of each approach: * **flatMap**: + Pros: More concise, expressive, and efficient (since it avoids the overhead of creating intermediate arrays). + Cons: May not be supported in older browsers or environments. * **Reduce with concat**: + Pros: Widely supported across browsers and environments, but may lead to performance issues due to array concatenation. + Cons: Less concise and less expressive than `flatMap`, requiring manual handling of intermediate arrays. **Library and Special JS Features** There is no library being used in this benchmark. The test only relies on standard JavaScript features. **Special JS Feature (ECMAScript 2019)** The `flatMap` method is a feature introduced in ECMAScript 2019, which allows for more concise and expressive array manipulation. This feature is not supported in older browsers or environments, which explains the inclusion of a second test case using `reduce with concat`. **Other Alternatives** If you're interested in exploring alternative approaches, here are a few options: * Using other flattening methods, such as `map` followed by `flat()`, or `forEach` and `push`. * Comparing performance with other array processing methods, like `filter` and `reduce` or using a library like Lodash. * Investigating the impact of specific browser features or extensions on performance. For this benchmark, the focus is on comparing the performance of two specific methods: `flatMap` and `reduce with concat`.
Related benchmarks:
flatMap vs reduce (inner object111)
flatMap vs reduce (inner object1111)
flatMap vs reduce (inner object11111)
Reduce Push vs. flatMap with subarrays
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?