Is performing a filter followed by a reduce less efficient than processing everything within a single reduce?

This is a 2 dimensionnal array.
First mapping, iterate each row (or line) and after mapping each row (or line), to change 'X' element to '*'

DRY

DRY not friendly

nice result, i totally forgot to DRY, thanks for the reminder

Worst time complexity solution, sorting and filter all the array element, so many iterations before get result ....

I dont believe time complexity was good with this solution, because first you sort all array, and after, you check all number from first to last, you can do exactly the same thing without sorting input array (just wath behind solution). So i really think sorting is useless here.

+1 not clever and not best practice

I don't think it was best practice because mutating original array is not a good practice

Code Duplication Warning

Return a new Array, but the original array is lost

+1 don't mutate original array

In Array.from method, second argument, after array length, is a map function, you can apply directly yur mapping, you don't need to call another map function.