Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
flatMap vs reduce 999
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
flat map vs reduce
Created:
3 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var values = [] for(i=0; i<1000; i++){ values.push([i, i]) }
Tests:
flat map
values.flatMap(e => e.map(i => i * 2))
reduce
values.reduce((acc, x) => { return acc.concat(x.map(i => i * 2)); }, [])
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
flat map
reduce
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. **What is being tested?** The provided benchmark compares two approaches for transforming an array of arrays: `flatMap` vs `reduce`. The test case uses an array of 1000 elements, where each element is itself an array containing the index and value. **Options compared:** 1. `flatMap`: This method returns a new array with the results of applying the provided function to each element in the original array. In this case, it maps each inner array to a new array with the doubled value. 2. `reduce`: This method applies a reduction function to each element in the original array and returns a single value. Here, it concatenates the results of mapping each inner array to a new array with the doubled value. **Pros and Cons:** 1. **`flatMap`**: * Pros: + Generally faster and more memory-efficient than `reduce`. + Can be used when you need to return an array from a reduction operation. * Cons: + May not be as intuitive or familiar to some developers, especially those with functional programming backgrounds. 2. **`reduce`**: * Pros: + More widely supported and understood by developers. + Can be used in combination with other methods for more complex transformations. * Cons: + May be slower than `flatMap` due to the overhead of concatenating arrays. **Other considerations:** In JavaScript, `flatMap` was introduced in ECMAScript 2019 (ES11) as a part of the Array.prototype method. It's designed to work with arrays and return a new array with the transformed elements. The `reduce` method has been around for longer and is also widely supported by most browsers. **Library:** There is no specific library used in this benchmark, only built-in JavaScript methods (`flatMap` and `reduce`). **Special JS feature or syntax:** None mentioned. However, it's worth noting that the use of arrow functions (`e => e.map(i => i * 2)`) is a modern JavaScript feature introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6).
Related benchmarks:
flatMap vs reduce test
flatMap vs reduce test 2
flatMap vs reduce test 3
Reduce Push vs. flatMap with subarrays
flatMap vs reduce (push)
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?