Benchmark: R.sort vs es6 sort

HTML Preparation code:

<script src='https://unpkg.com/ramda@0.23.0/dist/ramda.js'></script>

Script Preparation code:

function getRandomInt(max) {
  return Math.floor(Math.random() * Math.floor(max));
}

var arr = [];
for(var i = 0; i < 100000; i++){
  arr.push({value:getRandomInt(100)});
}

Tests:

R.sort
R.sort((a,b)=>a-b, arr);
es6 sort
arr.sort((a,b)=>a-b)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
R.sort
es6 sort

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 29 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'd be happy to explain the benchmark and its components.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark is designed to compare the performance of two sorting algorithms: Ramda's `sort` function (using JavaScript's arrow function syntax) and the built-in `sort` method in JavaScript (also known as "es6 sort").

**Options Compared**

The benchmark tests the performance of these two sorting algorithms on an array of 100,000 objects, each with a random `value` property generated using the `getRandomInt` function.

* Ramda's `sort` function uses the `ramda.js` library, which provides functional programming utilities. In this case, it is used to sort the array based on the `value` property of each object.
* The built-in `sort` method in JavaScript (es6 sort) sorts the array using its default comparison logic.

**Pros and Cons**

**Ramda's `sort` function:**

Pros:

* Provides a concise and expressive way to define sorting criteria using an arrow function.
* Utilizes functional programming principles, which can lead to more predictable and maintainable code.
* Can be used in conjunction with other Ramda functions for data transformations and processing.

Cons:

* May introduce additional overhead due to the library's functionality.
* Requires external dependencies (in this case, `ramda.js`).
* May not be as familiar or intuitive to developers without prior experience with functional programming.

**Built-in JavaScript `sort` method:**

Pros:

* Built into the language, so no additional libraries need to be installed.
* Generally more performant and optimized for native execution.
* Widely recognized and supported by most modern browsers.

Cons:

* Requires a more verbose syntax using callback functions or arrow functions (as in this benchmark).
* May not provide the same level of expressiveness or flexibility as Ramda's `sort` function.

**Other Considerations**

The benchmark assumes that both sorting algorithms have similar performance characteristics, and that the difference between them is solely due to implementation details. However, there may be additional factors affecting performance, such as:

* Array size and distribution (e.g., random vs. sequential data).
* Data type and complexity (e.g., integers, floats, or objects with nested properties).
* Browser or JavaScript engine optimizations.

**Library: Ramda**

Ramda is a popular JavaScript library for functional programming utilities, including `sort`. It provides a set of immutable functions that can be used to transform and process data. In this benchmark, Ramda's `sort` function is used to sort the array based on the `value` property of each object.

**Special JS Feature/ Syntax: Arrow Functions**

Arrow functions are a concise way to define small, single-expression functions in JavaScript. They were introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6) and provide a more modern syntax for defining function expressions.

In this benchmark, arrow functions are used to define the sorting criteria for both Ramda's `sort` function and the built-in `sort` method.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 5 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/68.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 68 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
R.sort	28.2 Ops/sec
es6 sort	28.8 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

R.sort vs es6 sort (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: R.sort vs es6 sort

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

R.sort

es6 sort

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 29 days ago):