Benchmark: Test concat vs flatter in loop etc

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/3.10.1/lodash.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var arr = [];
for (var i = 0; i < 10000; i++) {
	arr.push(() => [i]);
};

Tests:

Map
let nodesFoundByClassName = _.flatten(_.map(arr, (el) => el()));
Concat
let nodesFoundByClassName = []; for (let i = 0, len = arr.length; i < len; i++) nodesFoundByClassName = nodesFoundByClassName.concat(arr[i]());
Chain
let nodesFoundByClassName = _.chain(arr).map(arr, (el) => el()).flatten().value();
Push with end flatten
let nodesFoundByClassName = []; for (let i = 0, len = arr.length; i < len; i++) nodesFoundByClassName.push(arr[i]()); nodesFoundByClassName = _.flatten(nodesFoundByClassName);
Index assign with end flatten
var i = -1; var length = arr.length; var nodesFoundByClassName = Array(length); while (++i < length) { nodesFoundByClassName[i] = arr[i](); } nodesFoundByClassName = _.flatten(nodesFoundByClassName)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Map
Concat
Chain
Push with end flatten
Index assign with end flatten

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 27 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Measuring the performance of different JavaScript approaches can be a challenging task, but understanding what's being tested and compared is crucial.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark measures the performance of four different approaches to flatten an array of functions:

1. `Map`
2. `Concat`
3. `Chain` with `_.flatten()`
4. `Push` with `_.flatten()` at the end

The input data consists of 10,000 functions, each containing a single value (the index).

**Options Compared**

Here's a brief description of each approach:

1. **Map**: The `map()` method is called on the array of functions, and for each function, it calls itself with the current index as an argument. The resulting values are then flattened using `_flatten()`.
2. **Concat**: Each function is pushed onto an empty array and then concatenated into a single array.
3. **Chain** (`_.chain()` and `.flatten()`): `_.chain()` is used to create a chain of methods, and then `.map()` and `.flatten()` are called on the resulting chain.
4. **Push` with end flatten`: Each function is pushed onto an empty array using `push()`, and then after all functions have been added, `_flatten()` is called on the entire array.

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief summary of the pros and cons of each approach:

1. **Map**: Pros: concise and readable code; Cons: might be slower due to repeated function calls.
2. **Concat**: Pros: simple and straightforward; Cons: can lead to performance issues if the array is large.
3. **Chain** (`_.chain()` and `.flatten()`): Pros: efficient use of `_flatten()`: Cons: adds complexity with the chain of methods.
4. **Push` with end flatten`: Pros: avoids repeated function calls, but it's not immediately clear how it works.

**Libraries and Special Features**

The benchmark uses Lodash (version 3.10.1), a popular JavaScript library for functional programming utilities. The `_.flatten()` method is used to flatten the resulting arrays.

There are no special features or syntax used in this benchmark, just standard JavaScript language constructs.

**Other Alternatives**

If you were to optimize these approaches further, you could consider:

* Using `Array.prototype.reduce()` instead of `concat` or `push`.
* Utilizing SIMD (Single Instruction, Multiple Data) instructions for parallel processing.
* Compiling the code to machine code using a Just-In-Time (JIT) compiler.

Keep in mind that optimizations should be carefully evaluated based on performance requirements and potential trade-offs in terms of maintainability and readability.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 7 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/59.0.3071.115 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 59 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Map	631.1 Ops/sec
Concat	17.1 Ops/sec
Chain	56.7 Ops/sec
Push with end flatten	293.6 Ops/sec
Index assign with end flatten	447.3 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Test concat vs flatter in loop etc (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Map vs Concat vs Chain vs Push with end flatten vs Index assign with end flatten

Created: 7 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Map

Concat

Chain

Push with end flatten

Index assign with end flatten

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 27 days ago):