Benchmark: Switch vs Object Literal - testing with stable input

Script Preparation code:

var str = 'c';
// str = str.charAt(Math.floor(Math.random() * 3));

Tests:

Switch
switch (str) { case 'a': console.log('A'); break; case 'b': console.log('B'); break; case 'c': console.log('C'); break; }
Object Literal
var objLiteral = { a: function() { console.log('A'); }, b: function() { console.log('B'); }, c: function() { console.log('C'); } } 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 llama3.1:latest, generated one year ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the benchmark test case.

**What is being tested?**

The benchmark tests two different approaches to conditional execution in JavaScript: using `switch` statements and object literals.

**Test Case 1: Switch Statement**

In this test case, we have a simple `switch` statement that takes a string variable `str` as input. The `switch` statement uses the following syntax:
```javascript
switch (str) {
  case 'a': console.log('A'); break;
  case 'b': console.log('B'); break;
  case 'c': console.log('C'); break;
}
```
This code uses a `switch` statement to conditionally execute one of three possible cases based on the value of `str`. The `break` keyword is used to exit the switch block after executing each case.

**Test Case 2: Object Literal**

In this test case, we have an object literal that defines three functions (`a`, `b`, and `c`) as properties. We then use the string variable `str` as a property key to access one of these functions and execute it.
```javascript
var objLiteral = {
  a: function() { console.log('A'); },
  b: function() { console.log('B'); },
  c: function() { console.log('C'); }
};

objLiteral[str]();
```
This code uses an object literal to define a set of functions, and then uses the string variable `str` as a property key to access one of these functions. The `()` syntax is used to execute the accessed function.

**Pros and Cons**

The two approaches have different pros and cons:

* **Switch Statement:**
	+ Pros:
		- Easy to read and write
		- Fast execution, especially for large numbers of cases
	+ Cons:
		- Can be cumbersome to maintain if cases are added or removed frequently
		- May not be suitable for cases where the input is not a string or enum value
* **Object Literal:**
	+ Pros:
		- More flexible and maintainable than `switch` statements, especially when dealing with complex logic or dynamic inputs
		- Can be used as a data structure to store multiple functions or values
	+ Cons:
		- May be slower than `switch` statements due to the overhead of property access and function lookup
		- Requires more code and complexity for simple cases

**Considerations**

When choosing between these approaches, consider the following factors:

* **Frequency of case changes:** If cases are frequently added or removed, an object literal may be a better choice.
* **Input type:** If the input is not a string or enum value, an object literal may be more suitable.
* **Performance requirements:** If execution speed is critical, a `switch` statement may be preferred.

**Library**

In this test case, no external libraries are used.

**Special JavaScript feature or syntax**

The only special JavaScript feature or syntax used in this test case is the `break` keyword in the `switch` statement.

Related benchmarks:

Switch vs Object Literal - testing with stable input (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 llama3.1:latest, generated one year ago):