Toggle navigation
MeasureThat
.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
flatMap vs map/flat 2
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
Test flatMap vs Test map/flat
Created:
one year ago
by:
Guest
Go to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var arr = new Array(100).fill(1);
Tests:
Test flatMap
arr.flatMap((el) => el + 1);
Test map/flat
arr.map((el) => el + 1).flat();
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Test flatMap
Test map/flat
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/128.0.0.0 Safari/537.36
Browser/OS:
Chrome 128 on Windows
View result in a separate tab
Embed
Embed Benchmark Result
<iframe src="https://measurethat.net/Embed?id=553316" width="100%" height="500px"></iframe>
Test flatMap
193K/s
Test map/flat
120K/s
View exact numbers
Test name
Executions per second
✓
Test flatMap
192,508 Ops/sec
Test map/flat
120,271 Ops/sec
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
I'd be happy to explain what's being tested in the provided benchmark. **Benchmark Overview** The benchmark measures the performance difference between two approaches: `flatMap` and `map/flat`. The test case creates an array of 100 elements filled with the value `1`, then applies a transformation to each element using these two different methods. **Options Compared** There are two options being compared: 1. **`arr.flatMap((el) => el + 1);`**: This uses the `flatMap()` method, which is a modern JavaScript method that flattens an array of arrays into a single array. 2. **`arr.map((el) => el + 1).flat();`**: This combines two methods: `map()` and `.flat()`. The `map()` method applies the transformation to each element, while the `.flat()` method flattens the resulting array. **Pros and Cons of Each Approach** * **`flatMap()`**: + Pros: More concise and expressive code. It's often faster than using `map()` and `.flat()`. + Cons: Some older browsers or environments might not support it, as it was introduced in ECMAScript 2019. * **`map()` and `.flat()`**: + Pros: Widely supported across modern browsers and environments. They're also more explicit and easier to understand for developers who are familiar with these methods. + Cons: More verbose code compared to `flatMap()`. The two-step process can be less efficient than using a single method. **Library/Features Used** In this benchmark, no specific JavaScript library is used beyond the built-in methods (`map()` and `.flat()`). However, it's worth noting that some browsers or environments might have additional features enabled or disabled by default, which could affect the performance of these methods. **Special JS Features/Syntax** The `flatMap()` method uses a modern JavaScript feature called **template literals**, which allow you to embed expressions inside string literals. This syntax is not supported in all environments and was introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6). **Other Considerations** When choosing between these two approaches, consider the trade-offs between code readability, conciseness, and performance. If you're working with an older environment or need to ensure compatibility across different browsers, using `map()` and `.flat()` might be a safer choice. In terms of alternatives, other approaches for flattening arrays could include: * Using a simple loop: `arr.forEach((el) => arr.push(el + 1));` * Using the spread operator (`[...arr].push(el + 1)`) * Using a library like Lodash or Ramda, which provide specialized functions for array manipulation. However, these alternatives might not be as concise or expressive as using `flatMap()` or combining `map()` and `.flat()`.
Related benchmarks
flatMap vs map/flat
flatMap vs flat+map
flat() vs flatMap()
flatMap vs flat+map 2
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?