I agree with the main sentiment of the article: map() should be used for mapping and not for iterating. Why? In my opinion, to make the intention of your code clearer to your co-workers.
Then there is the article section about performance. Whenever an article mentions performance, I wish that the author would back it up with test results. Creating and throwing away an array of undefineds is not optimal, but is it noticeable? Will an array of 5,000 elements cause trouble? How about an array of 5 million elements? If it does cause trouble, what kind of trouble? The author's point about performance would be stronger if it were backed up by real test results.
Hope to see more articles from you in the future, Sebastian!
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
I agree with the main sentiment of the article: map() should be used for mapping and not for iterating. Why? In my opinion, to make the intention of your code clearer to your co-workers.
Then there is the article section about performance. Whenever an article mentions performance, I wish that the author would back it up with test results. Creating and throwing away an array of undefineds is not optimal, but is it noticeable? Will an array of 5,000 elements cause trouble? How about an array of 5 million elements? If it does cause trouble, what kind of trouble? The author's point about performance would be stronger if it were backed up by real test results.
Hope to see more articles from you in the future, Sebastian!