Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
for vs map to fill array fixed
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
for vs map
Created:
5 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
qty = 50; value = "lol";
Tests:
for
const arr = []; for (let i = 0; i < qty; i++) arr.push(value);
map
let arr = Array(3); arr = arr.map(() => value);
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
for
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):
Let's break down what's being tested in this JavaScript benchmark. The benchmark compares two approaches to fill an array with a fixed number of elements: using a `for` loop and using the `map()` method. **Approach 1: Using a `for` loop** ```javascript const arr = []; for (let i = 0; i < qty; i++) { arr.push(value); } ``` Pros: * This approach is generally easy to understand and implement. * It avoids the overhead of creating an intermediate array or modifying the original array. Cons: * It can be slower than other approaches because it uses a loop that increments manually, which may lead to unnecessary computations. * It requires manual incrementation of the loop variable (`i`), which can be error-prone and harder to maintain. **Approach 2: Using `map()`** ```javascript let arr = Array(3); arr = arr.map(() => value); ``` Pros: * This approach is concise and easy to read, making it a popular choice for many developers. * It leverages the optimized performance of the `map()` method, which is implemented in native code. Cons: * It creates an intermediate array that may consume more memory than necessary. * The initial assignment `let arr = Array(3)` is unnecessary and can be removed. Other considerations: * Both approaches have similar execution times for small to medium-sized arrays. However, as the array size increases, the `for` loop approach might become slower due to its manual incrementation overhead. * The `map()` method is often preferred because it's more concise and expressive, making it easier to write and maintain code. **Library/Utility** In this benchmark, no specific library or utility is used beyond the built-in JavaScript features. However, if we were to consider additional libraries or tools that could be used for performance optimization or array manipulation, some options might include: * `lodash`: A popular utility library with a wide range of functions for array manipulation and optimization. * `Array.prototype.fill()`: If available in the target browsers, this method can provide faster filling operations than using a loop. **Special JS feature/syntax** There are no special JavaScript features or syntaxes being tested in this benchmark. However, if we were to expand the scope to include other features like `let` declarations, destructuring, or async/await, that would require additional consideration and potential modifications to the benchmark code. Overall, this benchmark provides a straightforward comparison of two common approaches to filling an array with fixed elements, highlighting the trade-offs between conciseness, performance, and memory usage.
Related benchmarks:
Array.from vs. Array/fill/map
for vs map to fill array
fill vs map
Array.from vs Array.fill Simple
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?