Benchmark: String concatenation keys vs Multidimensional array keys2

Script Preparation code:

var numberList = Array(1000).fill().map((x, i) => i);

var concatList = numberList.reduce((acc, i1) => {
  numberList.forEach(i2 => { acc[`${i2}_${i2}`] = 'string'; });
  return acc;
}, {});

var twoDList = numberList.reduce((acc, i1) => {
  numberList.forEach((i2) => {
    if (!acc[i1]) acc[i1] = {};
    acc[i1][i2] = 'string';
  });
  return acc;
}, {});

Tests:

String concatenation keys
numberList.forEach((i1) => { numberList.forEach((i2) => { const variable = concatList[`${i2}_${i2}`]; }); });
Multidimensional array keys
numberList.forEach((i1) => { numberList.forEach((i2) => { const variable = twoDList[i2][i2]; }); });

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
String concatenation keys
Multidimensional array keys

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

No previous run results

This benchmark does not have any results yet. Be the first one to run it!

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down what is being tested in the provided JSON.

The benchmark defines two test cases:

1. **String Concatenation Keys**: This test case tests the performance of string concatenation using a multidimensional array as keys. The script creates an array `numberList` with 1000 elements and then uses `reduce()` to create another array `concatList`. For each element in `numberList`, it iterates over itself and sets a property on `concatList` using string concatenation (`concatList[`${i2}_${i2}`] = 'string'`). The test case then measures the execution time of iterating over `concatList` using nested loops.

2. **Multidimensional Array Keys**: This test case tests the performance of accessing elements in a multidimensional array using its keys. The script creates an array `numberList` with 1000 elements and then uses `reduce()` to create another object `twoDList`. For each element in `numberList`, it iterates over itself and sets properties on `twoDList` using string concatenation (`twoDList[i2][i2] = 'string'`). The test case then measures the execution time of iterating over `twoDList` using nested loops.

Now, let's discuss the options being compared:

**Options**

* **String Concatenation**: Both test cases use string concatenation to create keys for accessing elements in an array or object.
* **Multidimensional Array/Object Keys**: The two test cases differ in how they access elements using multidimensional array/object keys.

**Pros and Cons:**

* **String Concatenation**:
	+ Pros: Easy to implement, straightforward syntax.
	+ Cons: Can lead to slower performance due to the overhead of creating new strings and searching for keys.
* **Multidimensional Array/Object Keys**:
	+ Pros: Can be more efficient than string concatenation if the key is predictable and can be stored in a cache.
	+ Cons: Requires careful handling of edge cases (e.g., null or undefined keys), and the syntax can become complex.

Now, let's discuss some additional considerations:

* **Array Indexing**: Both test cases use array indexing to access elements. However, `concatList` is accessed using string concatenation, while `twoDList` uses actual array indices.
* **Object Literal Syntax**: The `twoDList` object literal syntax (`acc[i1][i2] = 'string';`) can be more concise and efficient than the equivalent string concatenation for multidimensional arrays.

Regarding special JS features or syntax:

* There is no mention of special JavaScript features or syntax in the provided benchmark definition.

Other alternatives to consider:

* **Array Methods**: Instead of using `reduce()` and nested loops, you could use array methods like `map()`, `forEach()`, or `every()` to iterate over arrays. However, this might not be directly comparable to the string concatenation approach.
* **Library Functions**: Depending on the specific requirements of your benchmark, you might want to consider using library functions that provide optimized performance for accessing elements in multidimensional arrays.

Keep in mind that these alternatives are not necessarily relevant to the provided benchmark definition and may require modifications to be applicable.

Related benchmarks:

String concatenation keys vs Multidimensional array keys2 (version: 1)

Comparing performance of: String concatenation keys vs Multidimensional array keys

Created: 5 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

String concatenation keys

Multidimensional array keys

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

No previous run results

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):