Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
flatMap vs Reduce with push - test
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
reduce vs flatmap
Created:
2 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var arr = Array(10_000).fill(0)
Tests:
reduce
arr.reduce((acc, x) => {acc.push(x, x); return acc;}, [])
flatmap
arr.flatMap(x => [x, x])
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
reduce
flatmap
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 break down the provided benchmark definition and its test cases. **Benchmark Definition** The benchmark definition is a JSON object that contains two scripts: `arr.reduce((acc, x) => { acc.push(x, x); return acc; }, [])` and `arr.flatMap(x => [x, x])`. These scripts are used to test the performance of JavaScript arrays when using the `reduce()` and `flatMap()` methods with a custom callback function that pushes elements onto an array. **Options Compared** The benchmark compares two approaches: 1. **Reduce Method**: The `reduce()` method is called on the array, passing a callback function that takes two arguments: `acc` (the accumulator) and `x`. The callback function pushes `x` twice (`x` and `x`) onto the accumulator array `acc`, and returns the updated accumulator. However, it's likely that only one element should be pushed. 2. **FlatMap Method**: The `flatMap()` method is called on the array, passing a callback function that takes one argument: `x`. The callback function returns an array of two elements (`[x, x]`), and the `flatMap()` method will flatten this result into a single array. **Pros and Cons** 1. **Reduce Method**: * Pros: Can be more intuitive for some use cases, as it accumulates values in a predictable way. * Cons: Inefficient because it creates a new array on each iteration, leading to memory allocation and deallocation overhead. 2. **FlatMap Method**: * Pros: More efficient than the `reduce()` method because it avoids creating intermediate arrays. * Cons: Less intuitive for some use cases, as it changes the order of elements. **Library** None **Special JS Feature or Syntax** The benchmark uses a common JavaScript idiom: using a callback function with the `push` method on an accumulator array. This is not specific to any particular library or syntax, but rather a fundamental concept in functional programming. **Other Considerations** * The benchmark only tests two approaches and does not consider other possible optimizations, such as using `Array.prototype.forEach()` instead of `reduce()`. * The test cases do not provide any control over the input data (e.g., array length or element type). **Alternatives** If you want to create your own microbenchmarking tool, here are some alternatives: 1. **Benchmark.js**: A popular and well-maintained benchmarking library for Node.js. 2. **BenchMarkDotJS**: Another widely-used benchmarking library for JavaScript. 3. **TestCafe**: A testing framework that includes a built-in benchmarking module. When creating your own benchmarking tool, consider the following: * Use a robust and efficient way to measure execution time (e.g., `Performance.now()` or `Date.now()`). * Provide control over input data and test cases. * Support multiple test environments and browsers. * Include features for filtering, grouping, and comparing results.
Related benchmarks:
flatMap vs reduce using push
flatMap vs reduce using push spread
Reduce Push vs. flatMap with subarrays
flatMap vs Reduce with push - test2
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?