Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Large Object Enum vs String LIteral
(version: 2)
Comparing performance of:
Enum Object vs String Literal
Created:
4 years ago
by:
Registered User
Jump to the latest result
Tests:
Enum Object
const EnumObject = { None: "None", Test1: "Test1", Test2: "Test2", Test3: "Test3", Test4: "Test4", Test5: "Test5", Test6: "Test6", Test7: "Test7", Test8: "Test8", Test9: "Test9", Test10: "Test10", Test11: "Test11", Test12: "Test12", Test13: "Test13", Test14: "Test14", Test15: "Test15", Test16: "Test16", Test17: "Test17", Test18: "Test18", Test19: "Test19", Test20: "Test20", Test21: "Test21", Test22: "Test22", Test23: "Test23", Test24: "Test24", Test25: "Test25", Test26: "Test26", Test27: "Test27", Test28: "Test28", Test29: "Test29" }; const enumVariable = EnumObject.Test; console.log(enumVariable);
String Literal
const literalVariable = "Test"; console.log(literalVariable);
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Enum Object
String 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):
The provided JSON represents two test cases for the MeasureThat.net JavaScript benchmarking platform: "Large Object Enum vs String Literal". **Benchmark Overview** This benchmark compares the performance of using an enum object versus a string literal in JavaScript. **Options Compared** Two options are being compared: 1. **Enum Object**: This option uses an enum object to define a set of named values, which can be used as variables or in conditional statements. 2. **String Literal**: This option uses a string literal, where the value is enclosed in double quotes (`"`) and cannot be easily changed. **Pros and Cons** **Enum Object:** Pros: * Provides explicit meaning to code, making it easier to understand and maintain * Can improve readability and reduce errors caused by typos or misspellings * Can be used with conditional statements and loops Cons: * Requires additional compilation step (to create a binary representation of the enum values) * Can increase code size, potentially leading to slower execution times in some cases **String Literal:** Pros: * Does not require any additional compilation steps * Can lead to faster execution times in some cases, as it eliminates the need for explicit type checking and casting Cons: * Can be error-prone if typos or misspellings occur * Can make code less readable and more difficult to maintain **Library Used** None is explicitly mentioned in the provided JSON. However, both options rely on JavaScript's built-in features. **Special JS Features/Syntax** The benchmark does not mention any special JS features or syntax. **Benchmark Preparation Code** The script preparation code for the benchmark is empty, which means that the test cases are likely written in a minimal way to focus solely on the performance difference between enum objects and string literals. **Other Alternatives** If you want to compare other approaches, here are some alternative options: * Using `const` declarations instead of variables * Using a function to define an enum-like object * Using a library or framework that provides an alternative implementation of enums (e.g., TypeScript) Keep in mind that these alternatives may have different performance characteristics and may not be directly comparable to the original benchmark.
Related benchmarks:
Intl.NumberFormat vs toLocalString
Intl.NumberFormat vs toLocalString 2
Intl.NumberFormat vs toLocalString ( predefine the NumberFormat instance )
cached Intl.NumberFormat vs toLocalString
Intl.NumberFormat vs toLocalString yoyo
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?