Benchmark: if push vs filter map

Script Preparation code:

var arr = [];
var i = 0;

while (i <= 1E5) arr[i] = i++;

Tests:

filter
let y = arr.filter(x => x % 3).map((x, i) => {return {x, i}});
if
let y = [] arr.forEach((x, i) => { if (x % 3) { y.push({x, i}); } });

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
filter
if

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 provided benchmark and explain what is tested, compared, and their pros and cons.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares two approaches to filter and map an array of numbers:

1. Using `filter()` followed by `map()`
2. Using a traditional `for` loop with conditional statements (`if`) to achieve the same result

**Script Preparation Code**

The script preparation code generates a large array `arr` with 100,000 elements using a `while` loop:
```javascript
var arr = [];
var i = 0;
while (i <= 1E5) arr[i] = i++;
```
This code creates an array that is guaranteed to be accessed by the filter and map functions.

**Html Preparation Code**

There is no HTML preparation code provided, which means that the benchmark does not simulate any user interaction or rendering.

**Test Cases**

The benchmark consists of two test cases:

1. **filter**
```javascript
let y = arr.filter(x => x % 3).map((x, i) => {return {x, i}});
```
This code uses `filter()` to remove elements that are not divisible by 3 and then applies `map()` to transform the remaining elements into objects with `x` and `i` properties.

2. **if**
```javascript
arr.forEach((x, i) => {
  if (x % 3) {
    y.push({x, i});
  }
});
```
This code uses a traditional `for` loop to iterate over the array, applies conditional logic (`if`) to filter elements, and pushes objects with `x` and `i` properties into an array `y`.

**Library**

There is no explicit library mentioned in the benchmark definition or test cases. However, it's likely that the `filter()` and `map()` functions are part of the native JavaScript API.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntaxes explicitly used in these examples.

**Benchmark Result**

The latest benchmark result shows the performance metrics for both test cases:

1. **filter**: 657 executions per second (on a Mac OS X 10.15.7 environment with Chrome 102)
2. **if**: 750 executions per second (on a Mac OS X 10.15.7 environment with Chrome 102)

**Comparison**

The benchmark compares the performance of two approaches to filter and map an array:

* `filter()` followed by `map()`: uses the native JavaScript API for filtering and mapping, which can be faster but may have higher overhead due to the function call stack.
* Traditional `for` loop with conditional statements (`if`): uses a more manual approach that can be slower but often provides more control over performance.

**Pros and Cons**

* **filter() followed by map():**
	+ Pros:
		- Native JavaScript API, potentially faster
		- More concise code
	+ Cons:
		- May have higher overhead due to function call stack
* **Traditional `for` loop with conditional statements (`if`):**
	+ Pros:
		- Provides more control over performance
		- Can be faster in some cases (e.g., when dealing with small arrays)
	+ Cons:
		- More verbose code
		- May require additional optimization

**Other Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternative approaches to filtering and mapping arrays, consider the following:

* `forEach()` followed by a callback function: similar to the traditional `for` loop approach but with more concise syntax.
* `reduce()` method: can be used for both filtering and mapping, often resulting in more efficient code.

Keep in mind that performance differences between these approaches may vary depending on the specific use case and environment.

Related benchmarks:

if push vs filter map (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: filter vs if

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

filter

if

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):