Benchmark: check map/filter and for

Script Preparation code:

var arr = [];
for (var i = 0; i < 12345; i++) {
  arr[i] = {number:i};
}

Tests:

foreach
let setNum = new Set(); arr.forEach((item) => { if (item.number %2==0) setNum.add(item.number); });
map and filter
let setNum = new Set(arr.filter(item => item.number%2==0).map(item => item.number));

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
foreach
map and filter

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 JSON benchmark definition, test cases, and latest benchmark results.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark defines two JavaScript microbenchmarks: `foreach` and `map and filter`. The `Name` and `Description` fields are empty, so we can't learn much about their purpose. However, based on the code snippets in the "Script Preparation Code" field, it seems like these benchmarks test performance comparison between using a traditional for loop (`foreach`) versus using the modern JavaScript methods `filter()` and `map()`.

**Script Preparation Code**

The script preparation code creates an array `arr` with 12345 elements, each containing a `number` property. This array will be used as input for both benchmarks.

**Html Preparation Code**

There is no HTML preparation code provided, which means the benchmark doesn't involve any DOM-related operations or rendering.

**Test Cases**

The test cases define two different implementations of the same algorithm:

1. **foreach**: This implementation uses a traditional for loop to iterate over the array and add even numbers to a Set called `setNum`.
2. **map and filter**: This implementation first filters out odd numbers using `filter()`, then maps the remaining elements to their `number` property using `map()`, and finally adds these numbers to the same Set `setNum`.

**Library**

In both test cases, a Set object (`Set`) is used as part of the algorithm. A Set in JavaScript is a collection of unique values, which allows for fast lookups, additions, and removals.

**Pros and Cons of different approaches**

Here's a brief summary of the pros and cons of each approach:

1. **foreach**: Traditional loop-based approach.
	* Pros: Easy to understand, can be optimized for specific use cases.
	* Cons: May not be as efficient as modern methods like `filter()` and `map()`.
2. **map and filter**: Modern JavaScript methods.
	* Pros: More concise, efficient, and expressive.
	* Cons: Can be less intuitive for beginners, may require additional setup (e.g., creating a Set).

**Special JS feature or syntax**

In this benchmark, the use of Sets (`Set`) is an example of modern JavaScript features. The `filter()` and `map()` methods are part of the ECMAScript standard since ES5.

**Other alternatives**

If you wanted to implement the `foreach` algorithm in a more traditional way, without using Set or modern methods:

* Use a counter variable instead of a Set for storing even numbers.
* Create an array to store even numbers and append it to the original array at the end.

In general, when working with performance-critical code, consider using optimized data structures like Sets, Arrays, or other suitable libraries. Also, be mindful of the trade-offs between conciseness, readability, and performance when choosing implementation approaches.

**Benchmark preparation**

To prepare a benchmark like this one, you would:

1. Define a clear problem or goal (e.g., comparing performance of different algorithms).
2. Write a script that creates a representative dataset.
3. Implement multiple test cases with different approaches to the problem.
4. Use a profiling tool or library to measure execution times for each test case.
5. Run the benchmark on various platforms, browsers, and hardware configurations.

By following this process, you can create robust and informative benchmarks like MeasureThat.net, helping developers understand performance trade-offs in JavaScript development.

Related benchmarks:

check map/filter and for (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: foreach vs map and filter

Created: 3 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

foreach

map and filter

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):