title: Why use purrr::map instead of lapply?
body: <p>Is there any reason why I should use</p>
  
  <pre><code>map(&lt;list-like-object&gt;, function(x) &lt;do stuff&gt;)
  </code></pre>
  
  <p>instead of</p>
  
  <pre><code>lapply(&lt;list-like-object&gt;, function(x) &lt;do stuff&gt;)
  </code></pre>
  
  <p>the output should be the same and the benchmarks I made seem to show that <code>lapply</code> is slightly faster (it should be as <code>map</code> needs to evaluate all the non-standard-evaluation input).</p>
  
  <p>So is there any reason why for such simple cases I should actually consider switching to <code>purrr::map</code>? I am not asking here about one's likes or dislikes about the syntax, other functionalities provided by purrr etc., but strictly about comparison of <code>purrr::map</code> with <code>lapply</code> assuming using the standard evaluation, i.e. <code>map(&lt;list-like-object&gt;, function(x) &lt;do stuff&gt;)</code>. Is there any advantage that <code>purrr::map</code> has in terms of performance, exception handling etc.? The comments below suggest that it does not, but maybe someone could elaborate a little bit more?</p>