Benchmark: flatMap vs reduce 99984545

Script Preparation code:

var values = []
for(i=0; i<10000; i++){ values.push(i) }

Tests:

flatMap
values.flatMap(i => [i, i * 2, i *3])
reduce
values.reduce((acc, x) => { acc.push(i, i* 2, i * 3) return acc; }, [])

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
flatMap
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):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks on MeasureThat.net!

The provided benchmark definition json represents two test cases: `flatMap` and `reduce`. These two functions are commonly used in JavaScript for array manipulation.

**What is being tested?**

In this case, we're testing the performance difference between using the `flatMap()` method versus the `reduce()` method when iterating over an array of numbers. Specifically, both methods will be applied to a large array of 10,000 elements (as defined in the "Script Preparation Code").

**Options compared:**

The two options being compared are:

1. **`flatMap()`**: This method returns a new array with the results of applying the provided function on every element in the calling array.
2. **`reduce()`**: This method applies a user-supplied function to each element in an array and reduces it to a single value.

**Pros and Cons:**

* `flatMap()` has the advantage of returning a new array, which can be beneficial when you need to process the results individually. However, this comes at the cost of potentially creating a large temporary array.
* `reduce()` accumulates the values in an array, making it more memory-efficient for larger datasets. However, it returns only one value as a result.

In general, if you need to process individual elements from an array, `flatMap()` might be a better choice. On the other hand, if you're working with large arrays and want to minimize memory usage, `reduce()` is likely a better option.

**Library usage:**

There are no libraries mentioned in this benchmark definition json. Both `flatMap()` and `reduce()` are built-in JavaScript methods.

**Special JS feature/syntax:**

None of the test cases use any special JavaScript features or syntax beyond what's commonly used for array manipulation.

Now, let's take a look at the latest benchmark results:

The first result shows that Chrome 105, running on a Mac with macOS 10.15.7, executes the `reduce()` method approximately 20 times faster than the `flatMap()` method, with an average of about 5224 executions per second and 249.9 executions per second, respectively.

This suggests that, in this specific case, `reduce()` is indeed more efficient on this particular platform and hardware configuration.

**Other alternatives:**

For array manipulation tasks like these, other approaches you might consider include:

* Using a for loop with explicit iteration
* Utilizing libraries like Lodash or Ramda for functional programming
* Leveraging modern JavaScript features like `Array.prototype.forEach()` or `async/await` for asynchronous processing

However, in this benchmark, the built-in `reduce()` and `flatMap()` methods are already being used, so it's interesting to see how they compare under different conditions!

Related benchmarks:

flatMap vs reduce 99984545 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: flatMap vs reduce

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

flatMap

reduce

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):