Benchmark: ramda vs normal range

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/ramda/0.25.0/ramda.min.js"></script>

Tests:

ramda
R.range(0, 5).map(i => console.log("ramda" + i));
normal
Array.from( { length: 5, }, (_, j) => { console.log(j) }, )

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
ramda
normal

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 definition and explanation.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark compares two approaches to creating an array with a specific range of numbers: using Ramda's `R.range()` function versus using JavaScript's built-in `Array.from()` method without any additional libraries or modifications.

**Options Compared**

There are two options being compared:

1. **Ramda's `R.range()`**: This is a functional programming approach that creates an array from a given range of numbers. It uses the Ramda library, which provides a functional programming framework for JavaScript.
2. **JavaScript's built-in `Array.from()` method**: This is a more traditional, imperative approach to creating an array with a specific range of numbers.

**Pros and Cons**

* **Ramda's `R.range()`**:
	+ Pros: Provides a concise and expressive way to create arrays from ranges, which can lead to shorter and more readable code.
	+ Cons: Requires the Ramda library, which may add overhead or introduce dependencies.
* **JavaScript's built-in `Array.from()` method**:
	+ Pros: No additional libraries are required, making it a lightweight option.
	+ Cons: The syntax can be more verbose and less concise than using Ramda's `R.range()`.

**Library Usage**

The benchmark uses the Ramda library (`https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/ramda/0.25.0/ramda.min.js`) to provide its functional programming framework, which is used in the first test case.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntaxes being tested in this benchmark. It's a straightforward comparison of two approaches.

**Other Considerations**

* The benchmark only compares these two specific approaches and does not account for other factors that might affect performance, such as:
	+ Array size: Larger arrays may lead to different performance characteristics.
	+ Data type: Using numbers versus strings or objects may impact performance.
	+ Browser or environment-specific optimizations.

**Alternative Approaches**

Other alternatives could include:

* Using `Array.from()` with a generator function (e.g., `function*(i) { yield i; }`).
* Implementing an array creation loop using traditional JavaScript (`var arr = []; for (var i = 0; i < 5; i++) { arr.push(i); }`).
* Utilizing other functional programming libraries or frameworks, such as Lodash.

Keep in mind that these alternative approaches might not be as concise or expressive as Ramda's `R.range()` and may require additional setup or dependencies.

Related benchmarks:

ramda vs normal range (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: ramda vs normal

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

ramda

normal

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):