Benchmark: sort v reduce - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

var a=Array.from({length:100},()=>Math.random());
var b = a.slice();

Tests:

sort
b.sort()
reduce
a.reduce((a,c) => a < c ? a : c)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
sort
reduce

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one month ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'd be happy to explain the benchmark and its results.

**Benchmark Overview**

The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark named "sort v reduce". It consists of two test cases: `sort` and `reduce`. The benchmark measures the performance difference between sorting an array using the `sort()` method versus reducing it using the `reduce()` method.

**Script Preparation Code**

The script preparation code is:
```javascript
var a = Array.from({length: 100}, () => Math.random());
var b = a.slice();
```
This code creates an array `a` of length 100 with random elements and then creates a copy of it, assigning the result to `b`. The purpose of this code is to create two arrays that will be used for testing.

**Html Preparation Code**

The HTML preparation code is not provided in the benchmark definition, but it's expected to be included by the user to provide some context or configuration for the benchmark. Since it's not present here, we'll assume it's either not needed or is handled elsewhere.

**Test Cases**

There are two test cases:

1. **sort**: This test case measures the performance of sorting an array `b` using the `sort()` method.
2. **reduce**: This test case measures the performance of reducing an array `a` using the `reduce()` method with a custom callback function.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares two options:

1. **Sorting an array**: The `sort()` method is used to sort the elements of an array in ascending or descending order.
2. **Reducing an array**: The `reduce()` method is used to apply a function against an accumulator and each element in the array, going from left to right, so as to reduce it to a single output value.

**Pros and Cons**

Here are some pros and cons of these two approaches:

* **Sorting an array (sort())**:
	+ Pros: Easy to use, intuitive API.
	+ Cons: O(n log n) time complexity in the worst case (when the array is sorted), can be slow for large datasets.
* **Reducing an array (reduce())**:
	+ Pros: More flexible and powerful than sorting, can be used for various tasks beyond just reduction.
	+ Cons: Steeper learning curve, more complex API.

**Library**

The `Array.from()` method is a modern JavaScript method that creates a new array from an iterable or an array-like object. It's commonly used to create arrays with a specific number of elements or from a given range.

In this benchmark, `Array.from()` is used to create the initial array `a`.

**Special JS Feature**

There are no special JS features mentioned in the provided code.

**Alternatives**

If you're interested in measuring performance differences between sorting and reducing an array, here are some alternative approaches:

1. **Using a different sorting algorithm**: Instead of using the built-in `sort()` method, you can use a custom sorting algorithm like quicksort or mergesort.
2. **Using a different reduction method**: Besides `reduce()`, there's also `forEach()` and `every()` that can be used for array processing.
3. **Using a library or framework**: Depending on your specific requirements, you might want to use a library or framework like Lodash or Ramda, which provide optimized and flexible data manipulation functions.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may have different trade-offs in terms of performance, complexity, and readability.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/83.0.4103.97 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 83 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
sort	245351.6 Ops/sec
reduce	7076442.5 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

sort v reduce (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: sort vs reduce

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

sort

reduce

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one month ago):