Benchmark: Reduce vs Constructor2

Tests:

111
const arr = []; for(let i=0; i< 100; ++i) arr.push("aaa"); const tt=[...(new Set(arr.map(c => c).filter(c => !!c)))];
222
const arr = []; for(let i=0; i< 100; ++i) { arr.push("aaa"); } const tt = Array.from( arr.reduce( (set, c) => { if (!c) return set; set.add(c); return set; }, new Set([]) ) );

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
111
222

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.

I'll break down the benchmark definition and test cases for you.

**Benchmark Definition:**

The benchmark definition is a JSON object that specifies how to prepare and run the test. In this case, there are two definitions:

1. "Reduce vs Constructor2": This name suggests that we're comparing the performance of two different approaches:
	* **Constructor 2**: Using `Array.from()` with the `reduce()` method.
	* **Constructor 1**: Manually pushing elements to an array and then using `Set` to filter out empty strings.
2. The "Script Preparation Code" field is empty, which means that no special code needs to be executed before running the test.

**Individual Test Cases:**

There are two test cases:

1. **111**
	* The benchmark definition is a JavaScript snippet that creates an array of 100 elements, pushes them onto the array, and then uses `Set` to filter out empty strings.
2. **222**
	* The benchmark definition is another JavaScript snippet that creates an array of 100 elements, pushes them onto the array, and then uses `Array.from()` with the `reduce()` method to create a new set from the filtered array.

**Options Compared:**

We're comparing two different approaches:

1. **Manual Construction**: Using `Set` to filter out empty strings after pushing elements onto an array.
2. **Constructor-based Construction**: Using `Array.from()` with the `reduce()` method to create a new set from the filtered array.

**Pros and Cons:**

### Manual Construction (111)

Pros:

* Simple and straightforward approach
* No overhead of creating a new array or using object methods

Cons:

* May incur additional overhead due to the push operation
* Less efficient than using `Array.from()` with `reduce()`

### Constructor-based Construction (222)

Pros:

* More efficient, as it uses built-in methods and avoids the push operation
* Can take advantage of optimizations in `Array.from()` and `reduce()`

Cons:

* More complex approach, requiring understanding of object methods and array manipulation
* May incur additional overhead due to creating a new set

**Other Considerations:**

* The use of `Set` provides a way to eliminate duplicates and improve performance by only keeping unique values.
* The use of `Array.from()` with `reduce()` provides a concise and efficient way to transform the array into a new collection.

**Library Usage:**

In this benchmark, we're using:

1. `Array.from()`: A built-in JavaScript method for creating a new array from an iterable.
2. `Set`: A built-in JavaScript object for storing unique values.
3. `reduce()`: A built-in JavaScript method for transforming the array into a new collection.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax:**

There is no special JavaScript feature or syntax being tested in this benchmark. It's focused on comparing two different approaches to constructing and filtering arrays.

**Alternatives:**

Other alternatives for constructing and filtering arrays could include:

* Using `map()` instead of `filter()`
* Using `forEach()` instead of `push()`
* Using a library like Lodash or Ramda for array manipulation
* Using a different data structure, such as a linked list or a tree

Related benchmarks:

Reduce vs Constructor2 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: 111 vs 222

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

111

222

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):