Benchmark: Switch vs Object Literal (Longer)

Script Preparation code:

var str = 'abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz';
str = str.charAt(Math.floor(Math.random() * 26));

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; case 'j': console.log('J'); break; case 'k': console.log('K'); break; case 'l': console.log('L'); break; case 'm': console.log('M'); break; case 'n': console.log('N'); break; case 'o': console.log('O'); break; case 'p': console.log('P'); break; case 'q': console.log('Q'); break; case 'r': console.log('R'); break; case 's': console.log('S'); break; case 't': console.log('T'); break; case 'u': console.log('U'); break; case 'v': console.log('V'); break; case 'w': console.log('W'); break; case 'x': console.log('X'); break; case 'y': console.log('Y'); break; case 'z': console.log('Z'); 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'); }, j: function() { console.log('J'); }, k: function() { console.log('K'); }, l: function() { console.log('L'); }, m: function() { console.log('M'); }, n: function() { console.log('N'); }, o: function() { console.log('O'); }, p: function() { console.log('P'); }, q: function() { console.log('Q'); }, r: function() { console.log('R'); }, s: function() { console.log('S'); }, t: function() { console.log('T'); }, u: function() { console.log('U'); }, v: function() { console.log('V'); }, w: function() { console.log('W'); }, x: function() { console.log('X'); }, y: function() { console.log('Y'); }, z: function() { console.log('Z'); } } 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:

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 the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared, and their pros and cons.

**Benchmark Definition**

The test case measures the performance difference between two approaches:

1. **Switch Statement**: A traditional switch statement is used to determine which action to take based on a value.
2. **Object Literal**: An object literal is used to store key-value pairs, where each key corresponds to an action and its associated function.

**Benchmark Preparation Code**

The script preparation code sets up the test environment:

```javascript
var str = 'abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz';
str = str.charAt(Math.floor(Math.random() * 26));
```

This code generates a random letter from the string "abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz" and assigns it to the `str` variable. This is done to make the test more representative of real-world scenarios.

**Individual Test Cases**

There are two test cases:

1. **Switch**: This test case uses a switch statement to determine which action to take based on the value of `str`.
```javascript
switch (str) {
  // ...
}
```
2. **Object Literal**: This test case uses an object literal to store key-value pairs, where each key corresponds to an action and its associated function.
```javascript
var objLiteral = {
  a: function() { console.log('A'); },
  b: function() { console.log('B'); },
  // ...
}
objLiteral[str]();
```
**Comparison**

The test case compares the performance of both approaches, measuring the number of executions per second.

**Pros and Cons**

* **Switch Statement**:
	+ Pros:
		- Easy to read and understand
		- Efficient for small values (e.g., 32 possible cases)
	+ Cons:
		- Can be slower for larger values (more than 32 cases) due to the overhead of the switch statement
		- May not work well with dynamic or complex logic
* **Object Literal**:
	+ Pros:
		- Flexible and scalable for any number of key-value pairs
		- Can handle complex logic more easily
	+ Cons:
		- Less readable and maintainable than a traditional switch statement
		- May incur additional overhead due to the creation of an object literal

**Library/Functionality**

There is no specific library or functionality being tested in this benchmark. The focus is solely on comparing the performance of two different approaches.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

None mentioned, but it's worth noting that the use of a random value for `str` makes this test more representative of real-world scenarios where the value is not always known beforehand.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternatives to these approaches, consider:

* **Using a lookup table**: Instead of using an object literal or switch statement, you could create a lookup table with precomputed results for each possible case. This can be more efficient than dynamic approaches.
* **Using a hash map**: A hash map data structure can provide fast lookups and insertions, making it suitable for large numbers of key-value pairs.
* **Caching**: If the logic being applied is computationally expensive or has a high variance in execution time, consider caching the results to reduce the overhead.

Related benchmarks:

Switch vs Object Literal (Longer) (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Switch vs Object Literal

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Switch

Object Literal

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):