Toggle navigation
MeasureThat
.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
Feature Requests
FAQ
Register
Log In
ramda vs normal range 5000
(version: 0)
Benchmark.js
Comparing performance of:
ramda vs normal
Created:
4 years ago
by:
Guest
Go to the latest result
HTML Preparation code:
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/ramda/0.25.0/ramda.min.js"></script>
Tests:
ramda
R.range(0, 5000).map(i => console.log("ramda" + i));
normal
Array.from( { length: 5000, }, (_, j) => { console.log(j) }, )
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
ramda
normal
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
Run details:
(Test run date:
one year ago
)
User agent:
Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/137.0.0.0 Safari/537.36
Browser/OS:
Chrome 137 on Mac OS X 10.15.7
View result in a separate tab
Embed
Embed Benchmark Result
<iframe src="https://measurethat.net/Embed?id=609037" width="100%" height="500px"></iframe>
ramda
128/s
normal
124/s
View exact numbers
Test name
Executions per second
✓
ramda
128 Ops/sec
normal
124 Ops/sec
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
Let's dive into the explanation of the provided benchmark. **Benchmark Definition** The benchmark is comparing two approaches to generate an array of numbers from 0 to 5000: using Ramda, a functional programming library for JavaScript, and the native `Array.from` method in modern JavaScript. **Options Compared** There are two options being compared: 1. **Ramda**: The first option uses Ramda's `R.range` function to generate an array of numbers from 0 to 5000. This approach is more concise and readable, as it leverages the functional programming paradigm. 2. **Native `Array.from` method**: The second option uses the native `Array.from` method with a generator function to achieve the same result. This approach is more verbose but still relatively simple. **Pros and Cons** Here are some pros and cons of each approach: **Ramda** Pros: * More concise and readable code * Leverages functional programming paradigm, which can lead to more efficient and composable code * Often used in functional programming and data processing tasks Cons: * Requires additional library (Ramda) to be included in the benchmark * May have slower performance due to overhead of function calls and object lookups **Native `Array.from` method** Pros: * No external libraries required, reducing performance overhead * Still relatively simple and straightforward code Cons: * More verbose and less readable compared to Ramda * Can be less efficient due to additional method calls and array indexing operations **Other Considerations** When choosing between these two approaches, consider the specific requirements of your project. If you need more concise and readable code for functional programming tasks, Ramda might be a good choice. However, if you prioritize performance and don't mind slightly longer code, the native `Array.from` method might be sufficient. **Library: Ramda** Ramda is a popular JavaScript library for functional programming. It provides a range of utility functions for data processing, transformation, and manipulation. In this benchmark, Ramda's `R.range` function generates an array of numbers from 0 to 5000 using a simple and efficient algorithm. **Special JS Feature/Syntax** There isn't any special JavaScript feature or syntax used in this benchmark. However, if you're interested in exploring other features like async/await or Promises, I can provide more information on those as well!
Related benchmarks
Ramda vs. Lodash vs Natice (filter, find)
ramda clone vs spread
Ramda range vs Array.from
Last element (Native vs Ramda vs Lodash)
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?