Benchmark: filter-map vs reduce with spread

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)=>{
  var value=mapping(x);
  if(!filtering(value)) return acc;
  return [...acc, value];
}

Tests:

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

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
map-filter
reduce

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; rv:141.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/141.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 141 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

map-filter

279K/s

reduce

3K/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ map-filter	278,671 Ops/sec
reduce	2,871 Ops/sec

filter-map vs reduce with spread (version: 1)

modified version of `map-filter vs reduce` that switches the order of operations

Comparing performance of: `map-filter vs reduce`

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

map-filter

reduce

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

filter-map vs reduce with spread (version: 1)

modified version of `map-filter vs reduce` that switches the order of operations

Comparing performance of: map-filter vs reduce

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

map-filter

reduce

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Related benchmarks

Comparing performance of: `map-filter vs reduce`