Benchmark: boolean chunks for vs reduce

Script Preparation code:

  const chunks = [
      [1, 2, 3],
      [4, 5],
      [7],
      [8],
      [1, 3, 5, 6, 7]
  ];

Tests:

for
const chunks = [ [1, 2, 3], [4, 5], [7], [8], [1, 3, 5, 6, 7] ]; const result = []; let resultIndex = 0; for (const chunk of chunks) { for (let i = 0; i < chunk.length; i++) { const value = i === 0; result[resultIndex++] = value; } } return result;
reduce
const chunks = [ [1, 2, 3], [4, 5], [7], [8], [1, 3, 5, 6, 7] ]; return chunks.reduce((acc, chunk) => { const booleanChunk = Array.from({ length: chunk.length }, (value, index) => { return index === 0; // First item of the chuck will be true, all other be false }); acc.push(...booleanChunk); return acc; }, []);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
for
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.

Let's break down the provided benchmark and explain what is tested, compared, and their pros/cons.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares two approaches to process an array of arrays: `for` loop and `reduce()` method. The test data consists of an array of chunks, where each chunk contains a variable number of elements.

**What is Tested?**

*   Two approaches to process the array of chunks:
    *   **For Loop:** A traditional `for` loop that iterates over each chunk and then over each element in the chunk.
    *   **Reduce Method:** The `reduce()` method, which applies a binary function (in this case, a simple boolean function) to all items in an array, going from left to right, so as to reduce it to a single output value.
*   Performance comparison between these two approaches.

**Comparison Options**

1.  **For Loop:**
    *   Pros:
        *   Easy to understand and implement.
        *   Can be used with any array of arrays.
    *   Cons:
        *   Can be slower for large datasets due to the overhead of the loop and the need to access each element individually.
2.  **Reduce Method:**
    *   Pros:
        *   More concise and expressive than a traditional `for` loop.
        *   Can be more efficient for large datasets, as it avoids the overhead of explicit loops.
    *   Cons:
        *   May require additional setup or familiarization with the `reduce()` method.

**Other Considerations**

*   **Library Usage:** In this benchmark, no libraries are explicitly mentioned. However, the `Array.from()` function is used to create a new array from an iterable (in this case, an object with a `length` property), which is a common JavaScript library.
*   **Special JS Features/Syntax:** There's no special JavaScript feature or syntax being tested in this benchmark. The code only uses standard JavaScript features and syntax.

**Alternative Approaches**

If you were to implement this benchmark yourself, here are alternative approaches you could consider:

1.  **Map Function:**
    *   Similar to the `reduce()` method, but applies a function to each element of an array and returns a new array with the results.
2.  **Array.prototype.forEach():**
    *   A more concise version of the traditional `for` loop, which applies a callback function to each element in an array.

**Additional Tips**

*   When benchmarking performance-critical code, it's essential to use reliable and repeatable benchmarks that isolate the specific code being tested.
*   Consider using a consistent testing framework or library to ensure consistency across different environments and browsers.
*   Don't forget to account for any potential overheads or optimizations in your test setup.

By understanding what is tested in this benchmark, you can better appreciate the trade-offs between different approaches to processing array of arrays and make informed decisions about which approach to use in your own code.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/107.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 107 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
for	12125982.0 Ops/sec
reduce	209826.2 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

boolean chunks for vs reduce (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: for vs reduce

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

for

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):