var arr = Array(10_000).fill(0)
arr.reduce((acc, x) => acc.concat(x), [])
arr.flatMap(x => [x, x])
--enable-precise-memory-info
flag.
Test case name | Result |
---|---|
Reduce | |
FlatMap |
Test name | Executions per second |
---|---|
Reduce | 1.2 Ops/sec |
FlatMap | 1326.0 Ops/sec |
What is being tested?
MeasureThat.net is testing the performance difference between two JavaScript methods: flatMap
and reduce
, with an additional approach using concat()
. The benchmark measures how many executions per second each method can perform on a large array of 10,000 zeros.
Options compared
The three approaches being compared are:
reduce()
with an initial value of an empty array ([]
) and then concatenates the results using the concat()
method.Pros and Cons
flatMap
, as it creates new intermediate arrays.flatMap
for certain use cases, especially when working with nested arrays.Library/Functionality
There is no specific library being used in this benchmark. However, JavaScript has built-in functions like Array.prototype.flatMap()
(introduced in ECMAScript 2019) that provide a similar functionality to flatMap()
. The use of concat()
is also a native JavaScript method for creating new arrays.
Special JS feature/syntax
This benchmark does not explicitly test any special JavaScript features or syntax. However, it assumes familiarity with the flatMap()
and reduce()
methods as well as basic understanding of array manipulation in JavaScript.
Other alternatives
If you're looking to implement this functionality without using flatMap()
:
reduce()
, consider using libraries like Lodash that provide a more readable and efficient implementation.In conclusion, the MeasureThat.net benchmark provides an excellent way to compare performance and readability between different JavaScript array methods. By understanding the pros and cons of each approach, developers can make informed decisions about which method best fits their needs.