Benchmark: filter-map vs reduce fixed vs for

Script Preparation code:

a=[];
for(i=0;i<1000;i++) a.push(Number(i)/1000);
var filtering=x=>(x*114514)%1>0.5;
var mapping=x=>x+0.1919;
var reducing=(acc,x)=>{
  if((x*114514)%1>0.5) acc.push(x+0.1919);
  return acc;
}

const forLoop = (a) => {
  let acc = []
  for (let i = 0; i < a.length; i++) {
    let x = a[i];
    if ((x * 114514) % 1 > 0.5) acc.push(x + 0.1919);
  }
  return acc
}

Tests:

map-filter
a.filter(filtering).map(mapping);
reduce
a.reduce(reducing,[]);
for
forLoop(a)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
map-filter
reduce
for

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:132.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/132.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 132 on Mac OS X 10.15

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
map-filter	240971.6 Ops/sec
reduce	386548.1 Ops/sec
for	399214.1 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

filter-map vs reduce fixed vs for (version: 1)

modified version of `map-filter vs reduce` that switches the order of operations Original was not fair comparison as it mapped all iterations not just the ones that passed the filter * added for loop

Comparing performance of: map-filter vs reduce vs for

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

map-filter

reduce

for

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A