Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
filter + map vs reduce 123456735235125
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
flatMap 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:
flatMap
values.flatMap(e => [e, e * 2])
reduce
values.reduce((acc, x) => { acc.concat([x, x * 2]); return acc; }, [])
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
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):
Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks! **What is tested on the provided JSON?** The provided JSON represents two individual test cases, `filter + map vs reduce 123456735235125` and its sub-benchmark, which are testing the performance comparison between two different approaches: `flatMap` and `reduce`. In this benchmark, we're using a sample array of 1000 elements, where each element is an array containing two values. The task is to perform a transformation on this data by mapping over it and creating a new array with transformed values. **Options being compared** The two options being compared are: 1. **`flatMap`**: This method returns a new array with the results of applying a provided function to each element in the calling array. It's like `map` but also flattens the resulting array. 2. **`reduce`**: This method applies a reducing function to each element in an array, accumulating a value (or values) as it goes. **Pros and Cons of each approach** * **`flatMap`**: + Pros: More readable code, can be more efficient when dealing with flat arrays. + Cons: Can be less intuitive for complex transformations, might not be supported by older browsers. * **`reduce`**: + Pros: Flexible and powerful for accumulating values, supports older browsers. + Cons: More verbose code, can lead to stack overflow errors if not implemented correctly. In general, `flatMap` is a more modern approach that's often preferred in modern JavaScript development. However, `reduce` is still widely supported and can be useful in certain scenarios. **Library used** None of the libraries are explicitly mentioned in the provided JSON. **Special JS feature or syntax** There isn't any specific mention of special features or syntax being used in this benchmark. **Other alternatives** If you were to write a similar benchmark, you might consider using other approaches like: * Using `Array.prototype.forEach` instead of `map` and `flatMap`. * Comparing performance with different data structures, such as arrays vs objects. * Testing the impact of various optimizations, like memoization or caching. Keep in mind that each approach has its trade-offs, and what works well for one use case might not be optimal for another.
Related benchmarks:
filter-map vs reduce
filter-map vs reduce 2
filter + map vs reduce 123
filter + map vs reduce 12345
filter + map vs reduce 12345153
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?