Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Benchmark: flatMap vs reduce vs while 2
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
flatMap vs reduce vs while
Created:
3 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var n = 1000
Tests:
flatMap
[...Array(n)].flatMap((x,i) => [++i,i++])
reduce
[...Array(n).keys()].reduce((acc, cur) => { acc.push(++cur, cur++); return acc; }, [])
while
let res = [], i=0; while(n>i++) res.push(i, i);
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (3)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
flatMap
reduce
while
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):
**Overview of the Benchmark** The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark test case, specifically designed to compare the performance of three different methods: `flatMap`, `reduce`, and `while`. The test is designed to measure which method is fastest for iterating over an array and performing some operation. **Test Case Options Compared** 1. **`flatMap`**: This method returns a new array with the results of applying the provided function on every element in this array. 2. **`reduce`**: This method applies a function against an accumulator and each element in the array (from left to right) to reduce it to a single value. 3. **`while`**: This loop iterates over the array using a counter variable, which is incremented on each iteration. **Pros and Cons of Each Approach** 1. **`flatMap`**: * Pros: Can be more efficient than `reduce` because it avoids creating an intermediate accumulator array. * Cons: Requires JavaScript 2019+ (ECMAScript) features (`flatMap` was introduced in ECMAScript 2019). 2. **`reduce`**: * Pros: Widely supported and has been around since ECMAScript 5 (2009), making it a good fallback option. * Cons: Creates an intermediate accumulator array, which can lead to performance issues for very large datasets. 3. **`while`**: * Pros: Low overhead, as it only uses basic loop constructs. * Cons: Not designed for iterative algorithms like this one; can be slower due to its nature. **Library Used (if applicable)** None of the provided test cases use a library specifically, but `flatMap` requires ECMAScript 2019+ features, which is built into modern JavaScript engines. If you're using an older engine or want to ensure compatibility with older browsers, you may need to polyfill `flatMap`. **Special JS Features or Syntax** None of the provided test cases use special JavaScript features or syntax beyond what's available in ECMAScript 2019+ (for `flatMap`). **Other Alternatives** For similar performance comparisons: * Consider using a benchmarking library like Benchmark.js, which can simplify setup and provide more features. * For `reduce`, you could also explore other alternatives like `forEach()` or creating a custom loop. To further optimize your code, consider factors like: * Array size: Larger arrays may benefit from optimized iterative algorithms. * Data distribution: Uniformly distributed data might favor one method over another. * Engine-specific optimizations: Some engines have specific optimizations for certain methods (e.g., WebKit's optimized `reduce` implementation). Keep in mind that these are general suggestions and the best approach depends on your specific use case.
Related benchmarks:
reduce vs. flatMap v3
Reduce vs flatMap performance
Reduce Push vs. flatMap with subarrays
flatMap vs reduce vs loop filtering vs filter/map performance
flatMap vs reduce-push vs flat
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?