Benchmark: Promo Map - MeasureThat.net

HTML Preparation code:

<html>
    <head>
        <script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/underscore.js/1.8.3/underscore-min.js"></script>
        <script>
        underscore = _;
        </script>


        <script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.12.0/lodash.min.js"></script>

        <script>
        lodash = _;
        </script>
    </head>
    <body>
    </body>
</html>

​x
 
<html>
    <head>
        <script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/underscore.js/1.8.3/underscore-min.js"></script>
        <script>
        underscore = _;
        </script>
​
​
        <script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.12.0/lodash.min.js"></script>
​
        <script>
        lodash = _;
        </script>
    </head>
    <body>
    </body>
</html>
​

Script Preparation code:

var PromosArray = [
    {
        type: "regular",
        display: "$123.00"
    },
    {
        type: "markdown",
        display: "$100.00"
    },
    {
        type: "promo",
        display: "$80.00"
    }
];

function testArrayIteration() {
    var items = [];
    var i;

    for (i = 0; i < PromosArray.length; i++) {
        items.push(PromosArray[i].type);
    }

    return items;
  
}

function testArrayMap() {
    return PromosArray.map(function (promo) {
        return promo.type;
    });
}

function testUnderscoreMap() {
    underscore.map(PromosArray, function (promo) {
        return promo.type;
    });
}

function testLodashMap() {
    lodash.map(PromosArray, function (promo) {
        return promo.type;
    });
}

function testForLoop() {
  	for (var i = 0; i < PromosArray.length; i++) {
     	return PromosArray[i].type; 
    }
}

 
​var PromosArray = [    {        type: "regular",        display: "$123.00"    },    {        type: "markdown",        display: "$100.00"    },    {        type: "promo",        display: "$80.00"    }];​function testArrayIteration() {    var items = [];    var i;​    for (i = 0; i < PromosArray.length; i++) {        items.push(PromosArray[i].type);    }​    return items;  }​function testArrayMap() {    return PromosArray.map(function (promo) {        return promo.type;    });}​function testUnderscoreMap() {    underscore.map(PromosArray, function (promo) {        return promo.type;    });}​function testLodashMap() {    lodash.map(PromosArray, function (promo) {        return promo.type;    });}​function testForLoop() {    for (var i = 0; i < PromosArray.length; i++) {        return PromosArray[i].type;     }}​

Tests:

testArrayIteration
testArrayIteration();
testArrayIteration();
testArrayMap
testArrayMap();
testArrayMap();
testUnderscoreMap
testUnderscoreMap();
testUnderscoreMap();
testLodashMap
testLodashMap();
testLodashMap();
testForLoop
testForLoop();
testForLoop();

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Experimental features:

Memory measurements supported only in Chrome.
For precise memory measurements Chrome must be launched with --enable-precise-memory-info flag.
More information: Monitoring JavaScript Memory

Test case name	Result
testArrayIteration
testArrayMap
testUnderscoreMap
testLodashMap
testForLoop

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 8 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; Trident/7.0; rv:11.0) like Gecko

Browser/OS: IE 11 on Windows 7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
testArrayIteration	9268117.0 Ops/sec
testArrayMap	6085396.5 Ops/sec
testUnderscoreMap	2445886.2 Ops/sec
testLodashMap	4222851.5 Ops/sec
testForLoop	22455824.0 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 6 months ago):

Let's dive into the world of MeasureThat.net and explore what's being tested in this benchmark.

Benchmark Overview

The benchmark is designed to compare the performance of four different approaches for iterating over an array:

For Loop
Array Iteration using map()
Underscore.js map()
Lodash.js map()

Each approach is compared with the others, and the results are displayed in a chart.

Options Compared

The four options being compared are:

For Loop: A traditional for loop that iterates over the array elements.
Array Iteration using map(): The map() method is called on the array to create a new array with the desired output.
Underscore.js map(): Underscore.js, a popular utility library, provides its own implementation of the map() method.
Lodash.js map(): Lodash.js, another utility library, also provides an implementation of the map() method.

Pros and Cons

Here are some pros and cons for each approach:

For Loop
- Pros: Simple, intuitive, and widely supported.
- Cons: Can be slower than other approaches due to the overhead of the loop control logic.
Array Iteration using map()
- Pros: Concise, expressive, and can be faster than traditional for loops.
- Cons: May incur additional overhead due to the creation of a new array.
Underscore.js map()
- Pros: Provides a consistent and predictable behavior across different browsers.
- Cons: Adds an extra dependency on Underscore.js library, which may not be necessary for all use cases.
**Lodash.js map()
- Pros: Similar to Underscore.js, providing a consistent behavior, but with additional functionality.
- Cons: Also adds an extra dependency on Lodash.js library.

Library Overview

The benchmark uses two utility libraries:

Underscore.js: A lightweight functional programming library that provides a set of utility functions for working with arrays and other data structures.
Lodash.js: A more comprehensive utility library that builds upon Underscore.js, providing additional functionality such as array methods, string manipulation, and more.

Special JS Feature/Syntax

None of the test cases use special JavaScript features or syntax beyond standard ES5/ES6 programming. The benchmark is designed to be language-agnostic, making it applicable to a wide range of browsers and environments.

Other Alternatives

If you're looking for alternatives to MeasureThat.net, here are some options:

Benchmark.js: A popular benchmarking library that allows you to write custom benchmarks using JavaScript.
Benchmark Suite: A collection of benchmarks written in JavaScript, covering various topics such as DOM manipulation, event handling, and more.
jsperf: An older benchmarking tool that allowed users to compare the performance of different JavaScript implementations.

I hope this explanation helps you understand what's being tested in this benchmark!

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of MeasureThat.net and explore what's being tested in this benchmark.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark is designed to compare the performance of four different approaches for iterating over an array:

1. **For Loop**
2. **Array Iteration using `map()`**
3. **Underscore.js `map()`**
4. **Lodash.js `map()`**

Each approach is compared with the others, and the results are displayed in a chart.

**Options Compared**

The four options being compared are:

1. **For Loop**: A traditional for loop that iterates over the array elements.
2. **Array Iteration using `map()`**: The `map()` method is called on the array to create a new array with the desired output.
3. **Underscore.js `map()`**: Underscore.js, a popular utility library, provides its own implementation of the `map()` method.
4. **Lodash.js `map()`**: Lodash.js, another utility library, also provides an implementation of the `map()` method.

**Pros and Cons**

Here are some pros and cons for each approach:

1. **For Loop**
	* Pros: Simple, intuitive, and widely supported.
	* Cons: Can be slower than other approaches due to the overhead of the loop control logic.
2. **Array Iteration using `map()`**
	* Pros: Concise, expressive, and can be faster than traditional for loops.
	* Cons: May incur additional overhead due to the creation of a new array.
3. **Underscore.js `map()`**
	* Pros: Provides a consistent and predictable behavior across different browsers.
	* Cons: Adds an extra dependency on Underscore.js library, which may not be necessary for all use cases.
4. **Lodash.js `map()`
	* Pros: Similar to Underscore.js, providing a consistent behavior, but with additional functionality.
	* Cons: Also adds an extra dependency on Lodash.js library.

**Library Overview**

The benchmark uses two utility libraries:

1. **Underscore.js**: A lightweight functional programming library that provides a set of utility functions for working with arrays and other data structures.
2. **Lodash.js**: A more comprehensive utility library that builds upon Underscore.js, providing additional functionality such as array methods, string manipulation, and more.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

**Other Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternatives to MeasureThat.net, here are some options:

1. **Benchmark.js**: A popular benchmarking library that allows you to write custom benchmarks using JavaScript.
2. **Benchmark Suite**: A collection of benchmarks written in JavaScript, covering various topics such as DOM manipulation, event handling, and more.
3. **jsperf**: An older benchmarking tool that allowed users to compare the performance of different JavaScript implementations.

I hope this explanation helps you understand what's being tested in this benchmark!

Related benchmarks:

Promo Map (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: testArrayIteration vs testArrayMap vs testUnderscoreMap vs testLodashMap vs testForLoop

Created: 8 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

testArrayIteration

testArrayMap

testUnderscoreMap

testLodashMap

testForLoop

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 6 months ago):