<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/lodash/4.16.0/lodash.min.js"></script>
var x = [1,2,3]
_.flatMap(x,x => [x-1, x, x+1])
x.flatMap(x => [x-1, x, x+1])
--enable-precise-memory-info
flag.
Test case name | Result |
---|---|
lodash.flatMap | |
Vanilla js flatmap |
Test name | Executions per second |
---|---|
lodash.flatMap | 19960556.0 Ops/sec |
Vanilla js flatmap | 9728345.0 Ops/sec |
I'll break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested.
Benchmark Overview
The benchmark is comparing two approaches to implementing flatMap
in JavaScript: using the Lodash library and the vanilla JavaScript implementation.
Lodash Library
The Lodash library is a popular utility library for JavaScript that provides a collection of small, reusable functions for various tasks. In this case, the library is used to implement the flatMap
function, which transforms each element of an array into an array of new values.
In the provided JSON, the library version being used is 4.16.0, which was available on the CDN at the time of benchmarking.
Vanilla JavaScript Implementation
The vanilla JavaScript implementation uses a simple recursive approach to implement flatMap
. The idea is to iterate over each element in the input array and transform it into an array of new values using the provided callback function. The transformed arrays are then flattened together using the spread operator (...
) or the concat()
method.
Comparison
The benchmark is comparing the performance of both approaches:
flatMap
implementationPros and Cons:
flatMap
implementation:flatMap
Other Considerations:
Alternative Implementations:
flatMap()
method for the Array
prototype. This implementation is likely to be optimized for performance.flatMap
. This could provide additional flexibility and optimizations.In summary, the benchmark provides valuable insights into the performance differences between using a well-optimized library like Lodash's flatMap
implementation versus implementing it yourself in vanilla JavaScript.