Benchmark: forEach vs filtermap3

Tests:

forEach
const testArray = [30, 31, 32, 29, 31, 16, 24, 22, 43, 56, 25, 34]; let outpUtArray = []; testArray.forEach(element => { outpUtArray.push(element * element); });
map
const testArray = [30, 31, 32, 29, 31, 16, 24, 22, 43, 56, 25, 34]; const mapArray2 = testArray .map(element => { return element * element; });

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
forEach
map

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 benchmark and its test cases.

**Overview**

The `MeasureThat.net` website allows users to create and run JavaScript microbenchmarks, comparing different approaches for specific tasks. In this case, we're looking at two test cases: `forEach` and `map`.

**Test Cases**

1. **`forEach` Test Case**
	* The benchmark defines a JavaScript function that iterates through an array using the `forEach` method.
	* The input array `testArray` contains 12 elements, ranging from 16 to 56.
	* The expected output is an empty array `outpUtArray`.
2. **`map` Test Case**
	* The benchmark defines a JavaScript function that iterates through the same input array `testArray` using the `map` method.
	* The `map` method applies a transformation to each element in the array, multiplying it by itself (`element * element`).
	* The expected output is an array of squared values.

**Comparison of Approaches**

In this benchmark, we're comparing two approaches:

1. **`forEach`**: Iterates through the array using a callback function, pushing each processed value to the output array.
2. **`map`**: Applies a transformation to each element in the array and returns a new array with the transformed values.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

* **`forEach`**:
	+ Pros: Can be used for simple iteration, easy to understand.
	+ Cons: Creates an empty output array, may lead to unnecessary allocations.
* **`map`**:
	+ Pros: Returns a new array with transformed values, efficient in terms of memory allocation.
	+ Cons: May require additional checks to handle edge cases (e.g., null or undefined elements).

**Library**

In this benchmark, there is no explicit mention of any JavaScript libraries. However, the use of `Array.prototype.forEach` and `Array.prototype.map` suggests that the test is using the built-in array methods.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

None mentioned in the provided code snippets.

**Other Alternatives**

If you were to rewrite this benchmark, you could consider alternative approaches, such as:

1. Using a custom loop (e.g., a `for` loop) instead of `forEach` or `map`.
2. Using `reduce()` instead of `forEach` or `map`.
3. Comparing the performance of using an array with other data structures, like `Set` or `Map`.

Keep in mind that these alternatives would require additional code changes and might not be directly comparable to the original benchmark.

I hope this explanation helps you understand the provided benchmark!

Related benchmarks:

forEach vs filtermap3 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: forEach vs map

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

forEach

map

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):