Benchmark: Object vs. Map - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

var eventsM = new Map([
    ['Disable template-include1', () => {
        console.log(1);
    }],
    ['Disable template-include2', () => {
        console.log(2);
    }],
    ['Disable template-include3', () => {
        console.log(3);
    }],
]);

var eventsO = {
    'Disable template-include1': () => {
        console.log(1);
    },
    'Disable template-include2': () => {
        console.log(2);
    },
    'Disable template-include3': () => {
        console.log(3);
    },
}

Tests:

GET from Object
eventsO['Disable template-include2']()
GET from Map
eventsM.get('Disable template-include2')()

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
GET from Object
GET from Map

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.

**Overview of the Benchmark**

The provided benchmark measures the performance difference between accessing object properties using square bracket notation (`eventsO['Disable template-include2']`) and accessing map keys using the `get()` method (`eventsM.get('Disable template-include2')`).

**Comparison Options**

There are two comparison options:

1. **Object Notation (Square Bracket Notation)**: Accessing object properties using square bracket notation, e.g., `eventsO['Disable template-include2']()`.
	* Pros:
		+ Wide support across browsers and platforms.
		+ Typically faster due to direct access to the property value.
	* Cons:
		+ May require additional steps for property lookup (e.g., checking if the key exists).
2. **Map Notation (get() Method)**: Accessing map keys using the `get()` method, e.g., `eventsM.get('Disable template-include2')()`.
	* Pros:
		+ Provides more control over the access process, allowing for error handling and fallbacks.
		+ Can be more readable in certain scenarios, especially when working with complex data structures.
	* Cons:
		+ May introduce additional overhead due to method invocation and potential lookups.

**Library Used**

The `Map` library is used to create a map object (`eventsM`). A map is an implementation of the Map interface, which allows for storing key-value pairs. In this benchmark, the map is used to simulate accessing keys using the `get()` method.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

None mentioned in the provided code snippets. However, it's worth noting that the use of template literals (`\r\n`) and the `console.log()` statements are specific to certain JavaScript environments (e.g., Node.js). These features are not universally supported across all browsers and platforms.

**Other Alternatives**

If you want to explore other alternatives for accessing object properties or map keys, consider the following options:

* **Property Access using bracket notation with optional chaining**: `eventsO['Disable template-include2']?.()` (introduced in ECMAScript 2020)
* **Function expression**: `function get(key) { return eventsO[key]() };`
* **Using a proxy**: Create a custom proxy object to intercept and modify property accesses.

Keep in mind that each alternative has its own trade-offs, performance implications, and platform support considerations.

Related benchmarks:

Object vs. Map (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: GET from Object vs GET from Map

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

GET from Object

GET from Map

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):