Benchmark: Switch vs Object Literal - SR Test

Script Preparation code:

var str = 'abcdefghi';
str = str.charAt(Math.floor(Math.random() * 3));

Tests:

Switch
switch (str) { case 'a': console.log('A'); break; case 'b': console.log('B'); break; case 'c': console.log('C'); break; case 'd': console.log('D'); break; case 'e': console.log('E'); break; case 'f': console.log('F'); break; case 'g': console.log('G'); break; case 'h': console.log('H'); break; case 'i': console.log('I'); break; }
Object Literal
var objLiteral = { a: function() { console.log('A'); }, b: function() { console.log('B'); }, c: function() { console.log('C'); }, d: function() { console.log('D'); }, e: function() { console.log('E'); }, f: function() { console.log('F'); }, g: function() { console.log('G'); }, h: function() { console.log('H'); }, i: function() { console.log('I'); } } objLiteral[str]();

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Switch
Object Literal

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/132.0.0.0 Safari/537.36 Edg/132.0.0.0

Browser/OS: Chrome 132 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Switch	334867.1 Ops/sec
Object Literal	314924.4 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Measuring the performance of JavaScript code is an essential task for any developer, and MeasureThat.net provides a fantastic platform to do just that.

**What's being tested?**

The provided JSON benchmark defines two test cases: `Switch` and `Object Literal`. Both tests measure the speed of executing a specific piece of JavaScript code.

In the `Switch` test case, the script uses a traditional `switch` statement with multiple `case` clauses to determine which action to take based on the value of the string variable `str`.

In the `Object Literal` test case, the script uses an object literal (an object defined using curly braces) and accesses its properties using the dot notation (`objLiteral[str]()`). The property names are assigned functions that log a specific message to the console.

**Options compared**

The two options being compared are:

1. **Switch statement**: A traditional `switch` statement is used to determine which action to take based on the value of the string variable `str`.
2. **Object Literal**: An object literal is used, and its properties are accessed using the dot notation (`objLiteral[str]()`).

**Pros and Cons**

* **Switch Statement:**
	+ Pros:
		- Can be more concise for simple cases.
		- Can use a single expression to determine which branch to take.
	+ Cons:
		- Can lead to slower performance due to the overhead of multiple `case` clauses.
		- May not be as efficient for large numbers of branches.
* **Object Literal:**
	+ Pros:
		- Can be more flexible and easier to maintain, especially for larger codebases.
		- Can avoid the overhead of a `switch` statement.
	+ Cons:
		- Requires more syntax and can be less readable for simple cases.

**Library and purpose**

In both test cases, no external library is used. However, in the `Object Literal` test case, JavaScript's built-in object literal feature is utilized.

**Special JS features or syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax used in these tests. The code uses standard JavaScript constructs like `switch`, object literals, and function declarations.

**Other alternatives**

Other alternatives to these approaches could include:

1. **Conditional statements**: Using `if` statements with conditional logic can be another way to implement a similar logic flow.
2. **Array methods**: For larger datasets or more complex logic, array methods like `map()` or `filter()` might be more suitable.

Keep in mind that the choice of implementation depends on the specific requirements and constraints of your project.

**Benchmark result analysis**

The provided benchmark results show the performance differences between the two options:

* The `Switch` test case executed approximately 110.7 executions per second, while the `Object Literal` test case executed around 58.6 executions per second.

This suggests that the traditional `switch` statement might be slower in this particular scenario due to its overhead and the need for multiple `case` clauses. However, it's essential to note that these results are specific to this benchmark and may not generalize to all use cases.

Related benchmarks:

Switch vs Object Literal - SR Test (version: 0)

Testing the speed of JS switch vs obj literal

Comparing performance of: Switch vs Object Literal

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Switch

Object Literal

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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