Benchmark: forEach vs reduce vs map vs filter vs forsdddffsfsff

Script Preparation code:

var arr = [];
for (var i = 0; i < 12345; i++) {
  arr[i] = i;
}

function someFn(i) {
  return (i * 3 * 8 / 1200 * 0.002 / 40 * 0.2);
}

var sumForEach = 0,
  sumReduce = 0,
  sumMap = 0,
  sumFilter = 0,
  sumFor = 0;

Tests:

map
arr.map(item => (sumMap += someFn(item)));
filter
arr.filter(item => (sumFilter += someFn(item)));
for
for (var j = 0; j < arr.length; j++) { sumFor += arr[j]; }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
map
filter
for

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 benchmark and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark is comparing four different approaches to perform operations on an array: `forEach`, `reduce`, `map`, and `filter`. The test case uses a custom function `someFn` that takes an integer as input and returns a result. The goal is to measure which approach is the fastest for this specific use case.

**Script Preparation Code**

The script preparation code creates an empty array `arr` with 12345 elements, initializes some variables, and defines the `someFn` function:
```javascript
var arr = [];
for (var i = 0; i < 12345; i++) {
  arr[i] = i;
}
function someFn(i) {
  return (i * 3 * 8 / 1200 * 0.002 / 40 * 0.2);
}
```
**Html Preparation Code**

There is no HTML preparation code provided, which means that the benchmark does not take into account any DOM-related overhead.

**Individual Test Cases**

The test cases are defined in the `Benchmark Definition` section of the JSON file:
```json
[
  {
    "Benchmark Definition": "arr.map(item => (sumMap += someFn(item)));",
    "Test Name": "map"
  },
  {
    "Benchmark Definition": "arr.filter(item => (sumFilter += someFn(item)));",
    "Test Name": "filter"
  },
  {
    "Benchmark Definition": "for (var j = 0; j < arr.length; j++) {\r\n  sumFor += arr[j];\r\n}",
    "Test Name": "for"
  }
]
```
Each test case defines a different approach to perform the operation:

* `map`: uses the `Array.prototype.map()` method to create a new array with the transformed elements.
* `filter`: uses the `Array.prototype.filter()` method to create a new array with only the elements that pass the test.
* `for`: uses a traditional `for` loop to iterate over the array and perform the operation.

**Library Used**

In all test cases, the `someFn` function is used, which suggests that it's a custom function. However, in the `map` and `filter` test cases, an additional variable `sumMap` or `sumFilter` is used to accumulate the results. This implies that these methods are using a accumulator parameter, which is a common pattern in functional programming.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

There is no special JavaScript feature or syntax being tested in this benchmark.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

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

* `map`:
	+ Pros: concise and expressive, creates a new array with transformed elements.
	+ Cons: can be memory-intensive if the resulting array is too large, may not be suitable for very large datasets.
* `filter`:
	+ Pros: efficient and fast, can be used to create a new array or filter existing data.
	+ Cons: may have higher overhead due to the creation of an intermediate array, can be slower than `map` if the dataset is small.
* `for`:
	+ Pros: familiar and intuitive, allows for manual control over iteration and caching results.
	+ Cons: can be verbose and error-prone, may not be suitable for large datasets or complex transformations.

**Other Alternatives**

Some alternative approaches to these methods include:

* Using other array methods like `forEach()` or `every()`
* Implementing a custom loop using `for...of` or `while` loops
* Using functional programming concepts like reduce and inject

However, it's worth noting that the chosen approach (map, filter, for) is often the most efficient and idiomatic way to solve this type of problem in JavaScript.

Related benchmarks:

forEach vs reduce vs map vs filter vs forsdddffsfsff (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: map vs filter vs for

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

map

filter

for

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):