Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
rxjs map map
(version: 0)
123
Comparing performance of:
map #1 vs map #2
Created:
2 years ago
by:
Registered User
Jump to the latest result
HTML Preparation code:
<script src='https://unpkg.com/rxjs@^7/dist/bundles/rxjs.umd.min.js'></script>
Script Preparation code:
var example = { rid: 123, data: [{ id: 1, name: 'name-1' }, { id: 2, name: 'name-2' }], summary: { count: 10 } }
Tests:
map #1
let { of, map } = rxjs; const sub1 = of(example).pipe( map( value => value.data), map( data => data.map( item => item.name)) ); sub1.subscribe()
map #2
let { of, map } = rxjs; const sub2 = of(example).pipe( map( data => data.data.map( item => item.name)) ); sub2.subscribe()
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
map #1
map #2
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):
**Benchmark Overview** The provided benchmark measures the performance of two different approaches to transforming data using the `map` function in the RxJS library. **Benchmark Definition JSON** The benchmark definition json contains three key elements: 1. **Script Preparation Code**: This code is executed by MeasureThat.net before running the benchmark. In this case, it defines an object `example` with some sample data. 2. **Html Preparation Code**: This code is used to include the RxJS library in the HTML document. 3. **Benchmark Definition**: This specifies the JavaScript function that will be run as part of the benchmark. **Individual Test Cases** There are two test cases: 1. **map #1** This test case defines a subscription `sub1` using the `pipe` method, which applies the `map` function to the `example` object and then maps over the resulting array. 2. **map #2** This test case is similar to the first one, but it uses a different approach: it uses the `map` function directly on the `example` object's `data` property, without using `pipe`. **Options Compared** The two test cases compare the performance of two approaches: 1. **Using `pipe`**: This approach involves using the `pipe` method to chain multiple transformations together. 2. **Direct Mapping**: This approach involves applying the `map` function directly on the original data. **Pros and Cons** **Using `pipe`:** Pros: * More flexible, as it allows for chaining multiple transformations * Can be more efficient, since it avoids creating unnecessary intermediate arrays Cons: * May incur additional overhead due to the creation of a new observable chain * Requires explicit management of the subscription **Direct Mapping** Pros: * Simplifies the code and eliminates the need for explicit subscription management * Often faster in practice, since it avoids the overhead of `pipe` Cons: * Less flexible than using `pipe`, as it limits the ability to chain transformations * May result in unnecessary intermediate arrays being created **Library: RxJS** RxJS (Reactive Extensions) is a library for functional programming on streams of data. The `map` function is used to transform each element of an observable sequence. In this benchmark, RxJS is used to create observables and manage subscriptions. **Special JS Feature/Syntax** There are no special JavaScript features or syntax used in these test cases. **Other Alternatives** If you wanted to write a similar benchmark, you could use other libraries or frameworks that provide reactive programming capabilities, such as: * Lodash * Ramda * Preact Keep in mind that the performance results may vary depending on the specific implementation and environment.
Related benchmarks:
lodash map performanc vs es6
lodash map vs es6 map (10000 times)
lodash flatmap 4.17.21
lodash flatmap 2
uniq vs groupBy
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?