Benchmark: Map vs Object // reallyLongName_

Script Preparation code:

var map = new Map();
var obj = {};

var varName = ('reallyLongName_' + Math.random());

map.set(varName, 5);
obj[varName] = 5;

var i = 0, count = 1000, a;

Tests:

Map lookup
for (i = 0; i < count; i++) { a = map.get(varName); }
Obj lookup
for (i = 0; i < count; i++) { a = obj[varName]; }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Map lookup
Obj lookup

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 benchmark and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark is comparing two approaches for looking up values in JavaScript: using an `Object` (specifically, a regular object) versus using a `Map`. A Map is a data structure that stores key-value pairs, allowing for efficient lookup of values based on their keys.

**Options Compared**

In this benchmark, we have two test cases:

1. **Object Lookup**: This tests the performance of looking up a value in a regular object (`obj`). The code uses the bracket notation `obj[varName]` to access the value.
2. **Map Lookup**: This tests the performance of looking up a value in a Map (`map`). The code uses the `get()` method of the Map, passing the key (`varName`) as an argument.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

**Object Lookup**

Pros:

* Wide browser support: Most browsers have native support for objects.
* Easy to implement: No additional libraries or data structures are required.

Cons:

* Slower lookup times compared to Maps due to slower lookup algorithms in objects.
* May not be suitable for large datasets due to memory constraints and slower access times.

**Map Lookup**

Pros:

* Faster lookup times: Maps use a hash table internally, making lookups much faster than object bracket notation.
* Scalability: Maps can handle larger datasets efficiently.

Cons:

* Less browser support: Older browsers may not have native support for Maps or may require polyfills.
* Requires additional library or data structure: Although most modern browsers support Maps natively, some older browsers might need a polyfill.

**Library and Features**

In this benchmark, the `Map` object is being used. The `Map` object is a built-in JavaScript object that allows you to store key-value pairs in an efficient manner. It's available in most modern browsers and provides faster lookup times compared to regular objects.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

This benchmark does not use any special JavaScript features or syntax beyond what's commonly used for basic scripting. If it did, I wouldn't mention it without further context.

**Alternative Benchmarks**

There are other alternatives for testing the performance of these two approaches:

* **Array Lookup**: Instead of using an object or Map, you could test the lookup time of values in an array.
* **IndexedDB or LocalStorage**: These storage solutions can be used to simulate larger datasets and benchmarking the performance of Map lookups in a more realistic scenario.
* **Other data structures**: You could also consider testing other data structures like `Set` or custom data structures to compare their performance with Maps.

Keep in mind that these alternatives would require adjustments to the benchmark code to accommodate the new data structure.

Related benchmarks:

Map vs Object // reallyLongName_ (version: 0)

Lookup of map vs object

Comparing performance of: Map lookup vs Obj lookup

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Map lookup

Obj lookup

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):