Benchmark: map vs _.map - MeasureThat.net

HTML Preparation code:


<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.5/lodash.min.js'></script>

Script Preparation code:


var arr = ['a', 'b', 'c'];

Tests:

map
arr.map(v=>' hi')
my map
function myMap(arr,fun) { if(!_.isArray(arr)) return -1; var res=[]; for(let i=0;i<arr.length;i++) res.push(fun(arr[i],i,arr)); return res; } myMap(arr,v=>' hi')
_.map
_.map(arr,v=>' hi')

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
map
my map
_.map

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the provided benchmark definition and explain what is being tested.

**Benchmark Description**

The test aims to compare three approaches:

1. Built-in JavaScript `Array.prototype.map()`
2. A custom implementation called "my map" (defined in a separate function)
3. Lodash's `_map()` function

These approaches will be compared on an array of strings (`arr = ['a', 'b', 'c']`).

**Options Compared**

The three options being compared are:

1. **Built-in JavaScript `Array.prototype.map()`**: This is the standard way to iterate over an array and create a new array with transformed values.
2. **"my map"`: A custom implementation of the mapping functionality, defined as a separate function that takes an array and a callback function as arguments.
3. **Lodash's `_map()` function**: Lodash is a utility library for JavaScript that provides various functions for tasks such as string manipulation, array manipulation, and more.

**Pros and Cons**

Here are some pros and cons of each approach:

1. **Built-in JavaScript `Array.prototype.map()`**
	* Pros: Fast, efficient, and widely supported.
	* Cons: Limited control over iteration order and behavior for edge cases.
2. **"my map"`**
	* Pros: Allows for custom implementation with full control over iteration order and behavior.
	* Cons: Requires more code and may be slower due to the additional overhead of a custom function.
3. **Lodash's `_map()` function**
	* Pros: Provides a convenient and well-tested implementation, with options for customizing behavior.
	* Cons: Adds an external dependency (Lodash), which may increase bundle size.

**Library and Special JS Feature**

The test uses the Lodash library (`https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.5/lodash.min.js`). Lodash provides a set of utility functions, including `_map()`, that can be used to simplify common tasks.

There is no special JavaScript feature or syntax being tested in this benchmark.

**Alternative Implementations**

For comparison, other implementations could include:

1. **V8's `Array.prototype.map()`**: The built-in implementation used by the V8 JavaScript engine.
2. **ES6 Proxy-based `map()`**: A proposal for a new way to implement `map()` using proxies, which aims to provide more control over iteration order and behavior.

These alternative implementations would require additional benchmarking to confirm their performance characteristics.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 4 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_5) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/83.0.4103.116 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 83 on Mac OS X 10.15.5

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
map	12958028.0 Ops/sec
my map	4570609.0 Ops/sec
_.map	4529793.5 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

map vs _.map (version: 2)

Comparing performance of: map vs my map vs _.map

Created: 4 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

map

my map

_.map

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):