Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
fdMap vs Objectasdfasdfasdfasdfdsfad
(version: 0)
Lookup of map vs object
Comparing performance of:
Map lookup vs Obj lookup
Created:
5 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Tests:
Map lookup
var map = ()=>new Map([[ 'foo', 'bar' ]]); map();
Obj lookup
var obj = ()=>({ foo: 'bar' }) obj();
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Map lookup
Obj lookup
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):
Let's break down the provided JSON benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared, and the pros/cons of different approaches. **Benchmark Definition** The benchmark is defined by the following JSON object: ```json { "Name": "fdMap vs Objectasdfasdfasdfasdfdsfad", "Description": "Lookup of map vs object" } ``` This benchmark compares the performance of two data structures: `Map` and an object (`obj`) used as a container. The description suggests that we're looking at the lookup operation in both cases. **Script Preparation Code** The script preparation code is null, which means that the JavaScript engine will create the objects and map instances automatically when running the benchmark. **Html Preparation Code** The html preparation code is also null, indicating that there are no additional setup or rendering tasks required for this benchmark. **Individual Test Cases** We have two individual test cases: ```json [ { "Benchmark Definition": "var map = ()=>new Map([[\r\n 'foo', 'bar'\r\n ]]);\r\n\r\nmap();", "Test Name": "Map lookup" }, { "Benchmark Definition": "var obj = ()=>({\r\n foo: 'bar'\r\n})\n\r\nobj();", "Test Name": "Obj lookup" } ] ``` These test cases define two JavaScript functions that create instances of `Map` and an object, respectively. The `map()` function is called on the map instance to trigger a lookup operation. **Library: `Map`** The `Map` class is part of the ECMAScript Standard Library, which means it's built into the browser engine (in this case, Chrome). The purpose of `Map` is to provide a data structure that stores key-value pairs and allows for efficient lookups using the `has()` method or by accessing values directly using bracket notation (`obj[key]`). **Library: Object** The object used as a container in the second test case is also part of the ECMAScript Standard Library. The purpose of objects is to provide a way to store key-value pairs and allows for flexible data storage and manipulation. **Special JS Feature/ Syntax: None** There are no special JavaScript features or syntax being tested in this benchmark. **Pros and Cons of Map vs Object Lookup** Here's a brief summary: * **Map Lookups** + Pros: - Efficient lookups using `has()` method - Bracket notation allows for direct access to values - Can handle large numbers of key-value pairs efficiently + Cons: - Requires `Map` object creation and lookup, which may incur overhead * **Object Lookups** + Pros: - Lightweight and easy to create/destroy - No additional overhead for lookup operations + Cons: - Less efficient lookups compared to Map - Limited key-value pair size (typically around 256) **Other Alternatives** For more complex data structures or larger-scale benchmarks, alternatives like: * `Set` for fast membership testing and set operations * `WeakMap` for storing references to objects in memory * Custom data structures (e.g., arrays, linked lists) might be used However, for this specific benchmark comparing Map and Object lookup performance, the focus remains on these two basic data structures.
Related benchmarks:
Map vs Objectasdfasdfasdfasdf
Map vs Objectasdfasdfasdfasdfdsfad
Object vs Map lookup w/ rando integer keys
Object vs Map lookup with int keys
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?