Benchmark: Ramda map vs Array.map - larger dataset (3000)

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="//cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/ramda/0.25.0/ramda.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

function double(n) {
	return n*2;
}
var data = [...Array(3000)].map((n, idx) => idx);

Tests:

Ramda
R.map(double, data);
Array (native)
data.map(double);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Ramda
Array (native)

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):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the benchmark and explain what's being tested.

**What is being tested?**

The benchmark measures the performance of two approaches: Ramda's `R.map()` function and JavaScript's native `Array.prototype.map()` method (also known as "native map").

**Options compared**

In this case, we have only two options to compare:

1. **Ramda's R.map()**: This is a functional programming style function that maps over an array, similar to the native `Array.prototype.map()` method. However, it uses Ramda's API and syntax.
2. **JavaScript's native Array.prototype.map()**: This is the built-in function in JavaScript that maps over an array.

**Pros and Cons of each approach**

Here are some pros and cons of each approach:

* **Ramda's R.map()**:
	+ Pros: Can be more concise and expressive, especially for complex transformations. Provides a functional programming style, which can be easier to read and maintain.
	+ Cons: May have a performance overhead due to the additional abstraction layer. Requires importing Ramda library.
* **JavaScript's native Array.prototype.map()**:
	+ Pros: Native implementation with known performance characteristics. No additional library required.
	+ Cons: Can be less expressive, especially for complex transformations.

**Library used**

In this benchmark, Ramda is used as a library to provide an alternative implementation of the `map()` function. Ramda is a functional programming library that provides a set of higher-order functions and utilities.

**Special JS feature or syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax used in this benchmark.

**Other alternatives**

If you want to run similar benchmarks, you can use other libraries like Lodash (similar to Ramda) or other functional programming styles. Additionally, you can also compare the performance of different JavaScript engines or platforms using various tools and frameworks.

To create a new benchmark on MeasureThat.net, you would need to:

1. Create a new benchmark definition JSON file with the required information.
2. Write the script preparation code that sets up the test data and any dependencies (e.g., importing libraries).
3. Define one or more individual test cases, each with its own benchmark definition and test name.
4. Run the benchmark using MeasureThat.net's tool.

I hope this explanation helps!

Related benchmarks:

Ramda map vs Array.map - larger dataset (3000) (version: 0)

measures the speed of ramda's map vs Array's native map

Comparing performance of: Ramda vs Array (native)

Created: 7 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Ramda

Array (native)

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

No previous run results

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