Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
reduce X for
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
for vs reduce
Created:
5 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var saldos = [1, 0, -2, -1, 3, 0, 1, 8, -10, 3, 0, -1, -3]; var contadorSaldoNegativo = 0;
Tests:
for
for (let i = 0; i < saldos.length; i++) { if (saldos[i] > 0) { contadorSaldoNegativo++; } }
reduce
let menorQueZero = (acc, cur) => acc + (cur < 0 ? 1 : 0);
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
for
reduce
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):
Let's break down the benchmark test and explain what's being tested. **Overview** The `MeasureThat.net` website allows users to create and run JavaScript microbenchmarks. The provided JSON represents two individual test cases: "for" and "reduce". **Test Case 1: "for" Loop** * **Script Preparation Code**: This code initializes an array `saldos` with sample values, including positive and negative numbers. * **Html Preparation Code**: None (empty string). * **Benchmark Definition**: The benchmark is defined as a JavaScript loop that iterates through the `saldos` array using a traditional `for` loop. Inside the loop, it checks if each element is greater than 0 and increments a counter (`contadorSaldoNegativo`) if true. * **Options Compared**: + **Traditional `for` loop**: Iterates over the array using an index variable (`i`) that increments on each iteration. + **Alternative approach not specified**: No alternative implementation is provided in this test case. Pros and Cons: * Traditional `for` loops are straightforward to write and understand, but they can be less efficient due to the overhead of indexing into the array. * Alternative approaches may provide better performance or efficiency, but require more complex logic. **Test Case 2: "reduce" Function** * **Benchmark Definition**: The benchmark is defined as a JavaScript implementation of the `reduce` function. The implementation takes an accumulator (`acc`) and each element in the `saldos` array (`cur`). It returns `acc + (cur < 0 ? 1 : 0)`. * **Options Compared**: + **Built-in `Array.prototype.reduce()` method**: Uses a specialized algorithm to accumulate values from the array. + **Custom implementation**: The user-provided implementation using a callback function. Pros and Cons: * Built-in `reduce` method is efficient and optimized for performance, but may not be well-understood by users who don't implement it themselves. * Custom implementation provides more control over the logic, but can be less efficient or more complex. **Library: Lodash** The custom implementation of the "reduce" function appears to use a library called Lodash. Lodash is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides a wide range of functions for tasks such as array manipulation, string processing, and functional programming. In this specific case, the `reduce` function in Lodash takes an accumulator (`acc`) and each element in the array (`cur`). It returns `acc + (cur < 0 ? 1 : 0)`, which is a simplified implementation of the built-in `Array.prototype.reduce()` method. **Other Alternatives** If you're interested in exploring alternative approaches to these benchmarks, here are some options: * **Using `for...of` loop**: A modern JavaScript feature that allows iterating over arrays without using traditional indexing. * **Using `forEach()` or `map()` methods**: Alternative array manipulation functions that can be used instead of traditional loops. * **Using WebAssembly (WASM)**: A binary format for representing code that can run on web browsers and other platforms, potentially offering better performance. Keep in mind that each alternative approach may have its own trade-offs in terms of readability, maintainability, and performance.
Related benchmarks:
Let vs Const
testperformanceloopmathmax
flatMap vs reduce test 2
flatMap vs reduce test 3
flatMap vs reduce 99984545
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?