Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Map vs Object setup 1
(version: 0)
setup of map vs object
Comparing performance of:
Map set vs Obj set
Created:
4 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
count = 1000
Tests:
Map set
var map = new Map(); for(var i = 0; i < count; i++){ map.set(i +'', i) }
Obj set
var obj = {}; for(var i = 0; i < count; i++){ obj[i] = i; }
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Map set
Obj set
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):
I'll break down the benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared, and their pros and cons. **Benchmark Overview** The benchmark compares two approaches to setting up objects (or in this case, Maps) for large-scale JavaScript applications: 1. **Object Setup**: Using a plain JavaScript object (`var obj = {}`) with bracket notation (`obj[i] = i;`) to set values. 2. **Map Setup**: Using the `Map` data structure (`var map = new Map();`) with string keys and values. **Options Compared** The benchmark tests two options: 1. **Plain Object (Object Setup)** * Pros: + Lightweight, as objects don't require additional memory for keys. + Fast lookup times due to object's property access. * Cons: + Can lead to slower performance when dealing with large datasets due to string concatenation and indexing. 2. **Map (Map Setup)** * Pros: + Faster performance than objects for large datasets, as maps provide O(1) lookup times. + Memory-efficient, as maps only store key-value pairs without additional memory for keys. * Cons: + Requires the `Map` constructor and has additional overhead due to its implementation. **Other Considerations** When choosing between these options: * **Size of dataset**: For small to medium-sized datasets, objects might be sufficient. However, when dealing with large datasets (e.g., > 1,000 elements), maps are likely to outperform objects. * **Lookup performance**: If fast lookup is crucial, maps provide a significant advantage over objects. **Library and Special JS Features** No external libraries or special JavaScript features are used in this benchmark. The `Map` constructor is the only library being tested, and it's a built-in part of JavaScript. **Alternative Approaches** Other alternatives to consider when setting up objects (or maps) include: 1. **Array**: Using arrays instead of objects/Maps for fast iteration and indexing. 2. **Proxy**: Using proxies to dynamically set values on objects or maps for flexible data manipulation. 3. **IndexedDB**: Using IndexedDB for storing and retrieving large amounts of structured data. However, these alternatives are not directly compared in this benchmark. I hope this explanation helps software engineers understand the benchmark's purpose and insights into optimizing JavaScript performance!
Related benchmarks:
Array.prototype.map vs Lodash map
Array from() vs Map.keys()
flatMap vs map/flat
new Map vs set array to map
Object.fromEntries vs Map
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?