a.
Let me mention that to keep the use of reduce on it's semantic intention, pass in a list of elements of type T then return a single value that is of type T.
b.
I prefer a loop over a reduce simply for performance reasons.
In my performance tests, a loop will run about 10% faster on small arrays, but precipitously faster as array size increases; In the thousands or millions, a loop will process 5 to 15 TIMES faster than reduce.
Resource
I've written an article on a criteria set one should consider when deciding over a choice of implementations to use.
tltr: should always choose the fastest implementation when robustness and security are equal.... dev.to/functional_js/squeezing-out...
Trouble maker and Problem solver ⚙️🔧
Loves simplicity, hates bullshit 💩.
Productivity obsessed, avid learner 🖥🚀
Sport and outdoor freak 🧗⛰
Metalhead 🎸🤘 Father of 2 👨👩👦👦
Opinions are my own
Good work Davide.
a.
Let me mention that to keep the use of reduce on it's semantic intention, pass in a list of elements of type T then return a single value that is of type T.
b.
I prefer a loop over a reduce simply for performance reasons.
In my performance tests, a loop will run about 10% faster on small arrays, but precipitously faster as array size increases; In the thousands or millions, a loop will process 5 to 15 TIMES faster than reduce.
Resource
I've written an article on a criteria set one should consider when deciding over a choice of implementations to use.
tltr: should always choose the fastest implementation when robustness and security are equal....
dev.to/functional_js/squeezing-out...
point A is very interesting. i like it. and it makes perfectly sense. and reduces the use cases for reduce :-)