Benchmark: Test_Currency111

Tests:

forEach
const currency = [{ usd: 5 }, { uah: 10 }, { usd: 3 }]; const merge = (data) => { const res = {}; data.forEach((item) => { for (let [key, value] of Object.entries(item)) { !res[key] ? (res[key] = value) : (res[key] += value); } }); return res; }; merge(currency)
Reduce
const currency = [{ usd: 5 }, { uah: 10 }, { usd: 3 }]; const result = currency.reduce((res, item) => { for (const [key, value] of Object.entries(item)) { !res[key] ? (res[key] = value) : (res[key] = res[key] + value); } return res; }, {});

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
forEach
Reduce

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 27 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks on MeasureThat.net.

**What is being tested?**

The provided benchmark measures the performance difference between two approaches: `forEach` and `reduce()` when merging an array of objects into a single object. The test case uses a simple example with three currency items, each with a USD value.

**Options compared**

There are two main options being compared:

1. **`forEach`**: This method iterates over the array using a traditional `for` loop and merges the values into an object.
2. **`reduce()`**: This method uses a callback function to reduce the array into a single object.

**Pros and Cons of each approach**

* **`forEach`**:
	+ Pros: Easy to read and understand, suitable for simple merging operations.
	+ Cons: Can be slower due to the traditional loop overhead.
* **`reduce()`**:
	+ Pros: Efficient and concise, often preferred for array reduction tasks.
	+ Cons: May be less intuitive for those unfamiliar with the `reduce()` method.

**Library and purpose**

There is no specific library being used in this benchmark. However, it's worth noting that both `forEach` and `reduce()` are built-in JavaScript methods, which means they don't require any external libraries to work.

**Special JS feature or syntax**

There doesn't seem to be any special JavaScript features or syntax being utilized in this benchmark. The code is straightforward and easy to understand, making it accessible to a wide range of developers.

**Other alternatives**

If you're interested in exploring alternative approaches, here are a few options:

1. **`map()`**: While not directly suitable for merging arrays into an object, `map()` can be used in conjunction with other methods to achieve similar results.
2. **`flat()```**: Another array method that could potentially be used for merging, although it might not provide the exact same result as `forEach` or `reduce()`.
3. **Third-party libraries**: Depending on your specific use case, you might consider using a library like Lodash, which provides various utility functions, including ones for array merging.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may have their own performance trade-offs and suitability for specific tasks.

I hope this explanation helps!

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 3 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/87.0.4280.66 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 87 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
forEach	790608.8 Ops/sec
Reduce	817715.2 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Test_Currency111 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: forEach vs Reduce

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

forEach

Reduce

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 27 days ago):