Benchmark: test reduce and foreach

Tests:

reduce
const currency = [{usd:5},{ush:10},{usd:3}] let obj =currency.reduce((acc,el)=> { key=Object.keys(el); typeof acc[key]==='undefined' ? acc[key]= el[key] : acc[key]=acc[key] + el[key]; return acc; })
foreach
const currency = [{usd:5},{ush:10},{usd:3}] let obj ={} currency.forEach(el => { key=Object.keys(el); typeof obj[key]==='undefined' ? obj[key]= el[key] : obj[key]=obj[key] + el[key]; })

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
reduce
foreach

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'd be happy to help you understand the provided JavaScript microbenchmarks on MeasureThat.net.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark consists of two individual test cases: "reduce" and "foreach". Both tests aim to measure the performance difference between using `reduce()` and `forEach()` methods in JavaScript.

**Options Compared**

In the "reduce()" test case, the options compared are:

* Using `typeof` operator to check if a key is undefined
* Assigning values to an object property using the `=` operator

In the "foreach" test case, the options compared are:

* Using `typeof` operator to check if a key is undefined
* Assigning values to an object property using the `+=` operator ( concatenation)

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

1. **Reduce()**
	* Pros:
		+ More concise and efficient way to create objects
		+ Reduces the need for manual key checking and assignment
	* Cons:
		+ May be slower due to the initial overhead of creating an accumulator object
		+ Less flexible, as it doesn't allow for easy iteration or manipulation of the array while iterating
2. **Foreach**
	* Pros:
		+ More flexible, allowing for easier iteration and manipulation of the array during iteration
		+ Can be faster due to the reduced overhead of creating an accumulator object
	* Cons:
		+ Less concise and may require more code to achieve the same result
		+ May lead to performance issues if the loop iterates over a large dataset

**Library Usage**

There is no explicit library usage in these benchmark test cases. However, it's worth noting that both `reduce()` and `forEach()` methods are built-in JavaScript methods.

**Special JS Features/Syntax**

Neither of the test cases uses any special or esoteric JavaScript features/syntax.

**Alternative Approaches**

If you were to write a similar benchmark, you might consider exploring alternative approaches, such as:

* Using `map()`, `filter()`, and `forEach()` together for more complex transformations
* Employing different data structures, like arrays vs. objects, to see how they impact performance
* Adding additional complexity by introducing errors or edge cases in the input data
* Comparing the performance of other JavaScript methods, such as `for` loops or `while` loops

Keep in mind that benchmarking JavaScript code can be complex and nuanced, and results may vary depending on the specific use case and environment.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 10; SM-J400F) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/86.0.4240.198 Mobile Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome Mobile 86 on Android

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
reduce	24435.4 Ops/sec
foreach	16606.5 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

test reduce and foreach (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: reduce vs foreach

Created: 3 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

reduce

foreach

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):