Benchmark: array.from.map vs array.from with map [large dataset]

HTML Preparation code:

<div id='1'></div>

Script Preparation code:

var set = new Set('x'.repeat(250000).split('').map(_ => ({uuid: crypto.randomUUID()})));

Tests:

array.from.map
Array.from(set).map(obj => obj.uuid);
array.from with map
Array.from(set, (obj) => obj.uuid)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
array.from.map
array.from with map

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/127.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 127 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
array.from.map	409.6 Ops/sec
array.from with map	176.8 Ops/sec

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 its test cases.

**Benchmark Overview**

The MeasureThat.net website is used to create and run JavaScript microbenchmarks, allowing users to compare the performance of different approaches to achieve a specific task. In this case, we have two test cases: `array.from.map` and `array.from with map`.

**Test Case 1: array.from.map**

This test case uses the `map()` method on an `Array.from()` call to transform an array of objects. The specific implementation is as follows:
```javascript
Array.from(set).map(obj => obj.uuid);
```
Here, we're using `Array.from()` to create an array from a `Set` object (`set`). Then, we're applying the `map()` method to this array, which transforms each element in the array by extracting the `uuid` property from the objects.

**Pros and Cons**

The `map()` approach has some advantages:

* **Code readability**: The code is straightforward and easy to understand.
* **Concise**: This implementation is very concise and gets the job done quickly.

However, there are also some potential drawbacks:

* **Performance overhead**: The `map()` method can introduce additional overhead due to its internal implementation. For larger datasets, this might impact performance.
* **Extra function call**: Applying `map()` as a separate function call introduces an extra function call, which could potentially lead to slower execution.

**Test Case 2: array.from with map**

This test case uses the same approach but wraps the `Array.from()` call in a callback function:
```javascript
Array.from(set, (obj) => obj.uuid);
```
Here, we're using an arrow function `(obj) => obj.uuid` as the callback function for `Array.from()`. This implementation applies the same transformation to each element in the array as before.

**Pros and Cons**

The `array.from with map` approach has some advantages:

* **Reduced overhead**: By applying the transformation directly to the `Array.from()` call, we avoid the extra function call overhead of the previous test case.
* **Simplified code**: The implementation is slightly more concise than the previous test case.

However, there are also some potential drawbacks:

* **Less readable**: Some developers might find this approach less readable due to the need for an additional lambda function.
* **Potential issues with callback functions**: If not used carefully, callback functions can lead to memory leaks or other issues. However, in this specific implementation, the arrow function is a straightforward and safe choice.

**Library Usage**

In both test cases, we're using the `Array.from()` method from the ECMAScript standard library (ECMAScript 2015 and later). This method is used to create an array from an iterable object.

**Special JS Features/Syntax**

This benchmark does not use any special JavaScript features or syntax that would impact its execution. Both test cases rely solely on standard JavaScript language features.

**Other Alternatives**

For this specific task, some alternative approaches might include:

* Using `Array.prototype.reduce()` instead of `map()`, as both are suitable for transforming arrays.
* Utilizing a third-party library like Lodash or Ramda, which provide more extensive array manipulation functions (although this would likely increase the benchmark's complexity).
* Using a different data structure, such as an array of objects with pre-defined properties.

However, these alternatives might not be directly comparable to the `array.from.map` and `array.from with map` approaches in terms of performance and simplicity.

Related benchmarks:

array.from.map vs array.from with map [large dataset] (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: array.from.map vs array.from with map

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

array.from.map

array.from with map

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):