Benchmark: Partition Arrays

Script Preparation code:

function getRandomIntInclusive(min, max) {
  min = Math.ceil(min);
  max = Math.floor(max);
  return Math.floor(Math.random() * (max - min + 1)) + min; //The maximum is inclusive and the minimum is inclusive 
}

var arrayOfRandomInts = Array.from({length: 1000}, () => getRandomIntInclusive(1,10));

Tests:

Reduce + Spread
function partition(array, isValid) { return array.reduce(([pass, fail], elem) => { return isValid(elem) ? [[...pass, elem], fail] : [pass, [...fail, elem]]; }, [[], []]); } const [pass, fail] = partition(arrayOfRandomInts, (e) => e > 5); console.log(pass.length, fail.length);
Iteration
function partition(array, isValid) { const pass = []; const fail = []; array.forEach(elem => { isValid(elem) ? pass.push(elem) : fail.push(elem); }); return [pass, fail]; } const [pass, fail] = partition(arrayOfRandomInts, (e) => e > 5); console.log(pass.length, fail.length);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Reduce + Spread
Iteration

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 provided JSON and explain what's being tested, compared, and their pros/cons.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is defined by a JavaScript function named `partition` that takes an array and a validation function as arguments. The function returns two arrays: one for elements that pass the validation and another for elements that fail.

**Test Cases**

There are two test cases:

1. **Reduce + Spread**: This test case uses the `reduce` method along with the spread operator (`...`) to partition the array.
2. **Iteration**: This test case uses a traditional `forEach` loop to iterate through the array and partition it.

**Library: Lodash**

The `partition` function in both test cases is likely using the Lodash library, which provides a `partition` function that can be used to split an array into two parts based on a predicate.

```javascript
const _ = require('lodash');
// or
import { partition } from 'lodash';
```

**Special JS Features/Syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax mentioned in the benchmark definition. However, it's worth noting that the `reduce` method and spread operator (`...`) are modern JavaScript features.

**Pros and Cons of Approaches**

1. **Reduce + Spread**
	* Pros: concise, efficient, and easy to read.
	* Cons: may be less intuitive for developers who are not familiar with these features.
2. **Iteration**
	* Pros: widely supported, no special features or syntax required.
	* Cons: may be less efficient than the `reduce` method.

**Other Alternatives**

If you want to implement a similar partitioning function without using Lodash or the `reduce` method, you can use a traditional loop:

```javascript
function partition(array, isValid) {
  let pass = [];
  let fail = [];
  for (let elem of array) {
    if (isValid(elem)) {
      pass.push(elem);
    } else {
      fail.push(elem);
    }
  }
  return [pass, fail];
}
```

Alternatively, you can use a more functional programming-style approach with the `filter` method:

```javascript
function partition(array, isValid) {
  return [array.filter(isValid), array.filter((elem) => !isValid)];
}
```

In summary, the benchmark is testing two different approaches to partitioning an array: using the `reduce` method with spread operator (`Reduce + Spread`) and a traditional loop (`Iteration`). The choice of approach depends on personal preference, familiarity with modern JavaScript features, and the desired level of efficiency.

Related benchmarks:

Partition Arrays (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Reduce + Spread vs Iteration

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Reduce + Spread

Iteration

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):