Benchmark: Map, filter, concat, intersection comparison

HTML Preparation code:

<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.5/lodash.min.js'></script>

Tests:

Map, filter, concat
const offerGameIds = [ { GameId: '4222'}, { GameId: '4208'}, { GameId: '4165'}, { GameId: '4434'}, { GameId: '4200'}, { GameId: '4182'}, { GameId: '4215'}, { GameId: '4114'}, { GameId: '4219'}, { GameId: '4035'}, { GameId: '4070'}, ]; const cmsGameIds = [4222, 4253, 4215, 4141, 4178, 4182, 4135, 4217, 4200, 4194, 4114, 4193, 4219, 4184, 4216, 4142, 4079, 4070, 4035, 4110]; const infoOfferGameIds = offerGameIds.map(item => +item.GameId) const includedGameIds = offerGameIds.filter(id => cmsGameIds.includes(id)); const combinedGameIds = cmsGameIds.filter(id => !includedGameIds.includes(id)); const finalArray = includedGameIds.concat(combinedGameIds);
Intersection, union
const offerGameIds = [ { GameId: '4222'}, { GameId: '4208'}, { GameId: '4165'}, { GameId: '4434'}, { GameId: '4200'}, { GameId: '4182'}, { GameId: '4215'}, { GameId: '4114'}, { GameId: '4219'}, { GameId: '4035'}, { GameId: '4070'}, ]; const cmsGameIds = [4222, 4253, 4215, 4141, 4178, 4182, 4135, 4217, 4200, 4194, 4114, 4193, 4219, 4184, 4216, 4142, 4079, 4070, 4035, 4110]; const infoOfferGameIds = offerGameIds.map(item => +item.GameId); const intersection = _.intersection(infoOfferGameIds, cmsGameIds); const finalArray = _.union(intersection, _.without(cmsGameIds, ...intersection));

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Map, filter, concat
Intersection, union

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.

Measuring JavaScript performance is crucial for optimizing web applications.

Let's break down the provided benchmark and analyze what's being tested:

**Benchmark Definition**: The website uses JSON data to define two benchmarks:

1. "Map, filter, concat"
2. "Intersection, union"

These tests compare different approaches to manipulate arrays of objects.

**Options Compared**:

1. **Manual iteration** (for "Map, filter, concat"): This approach involves using a loop or a `forEach` method to iterate over the array and perform the desired operations.
2. **Lodash library** (for both benchmarks): Lodash is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides various functions for tasks like mapping, filtering, intersecting, and unionizing arrays.

**Pros and Cons of each approach:**

1. Manual iteration:
	* Pros: Control over performance, no dependencies on external libraries.
	* Cons: More complex code, potential performance overhead due to branching and loop control.
2. Lodash library:
	* Pros: Efficient implementation, reduced boilerplate code, and easier maintenance.
	* Cons: External dependency, potential performance impact due to function calls.

**Library usage**: The "Intersection, union" benchmark uses the `_.intersection()` and `_.union()` functions from Lodash to perform array operations. These functions are likely implemented in C++ or another high-performance language, which can result in better performance compared to manual iteration.

**Special JavaScript features/syntax**: None of the provided benchmarks explicitly use special JavaScript features like async/await, promise chaining, or modern ES6+ syntax (e.g., `for...of`, arrow functions). However, using a library like Lodash might introduce some syntactic complexity due to its functional programming style.

**Other alternatives**: If you prefer not to use an external library, you can implement these operations manually using JavaScript's built-in array methods. For example, `_.intersection()` could be implemented as:
```javascript
function intersection(arr1, arr2) {
  return arr1.filter(value => arr2.includes(value));
}
```
However, this approach would likely result in slower performance compared to the Lodash implementation.

**Benchmark interpretation**: The provided benchmark results show the performance differences between manual iteration and using the Lodash library for array operations. For "Map, filter, concat," the Lodash implementation seems to be faster (1252181.75 executions per second vs. 338576.125). For "Intersection, union," both approaches result in similar execution rates.

When interpreting benchmark results, keep in mind factors like:

* Hardware and software configuration
* Browser or runtime environment specifics
* Code optimization techniques used during benchmark preparation

These factors can impact the accuracy of performance comparisons between different implementations.

In summary, the provided benchmark tests two common array manipulation scenarios using Lodash library functions vs. manual iteration. The results highlight the efficiency of using optimized third-party libraries for performance-critical code paths.

Related benchmarks:

Map, filter, concat, intersection comparison (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Map, filter, concat vs Intersection, union

Created: 6 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

Map, filter, concat

Intersection, union

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):