Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
testestets
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
map vs obj
Created:
3 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Tests:
map
map = new Map(), n = 1000000; for (let i = 0; i < n; i++) { map.set(i, i); }
obj
let obj = {}, n = 1000000; for (let i = 0; i < n; 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
obj
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):
Let's dive into the world of MeasureThat.net and explore what's being tested in these benchmark cases. **Benchmark Definition JSON** The provided Benchmark Definition JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark. It contains four essential fields: 1. **Name**: The name of the benchmark, which is "testestets" (note that this might be a placeholder or typo). 2. **Description**: A null value, indicating that there's no detailed description for this benchmark. 3. **Script Preparation Code**: Another null value, meaning no specific code needs to be executed before running the benchmark. 4. **Html Preparation Code**: Also null, indicating no HTML code is required for setup. **Individual Test Cases** The benchmark consists of two test cases: 1. **map** * The **Benchmark Definition** script creates a new `Map` object and sets 1 million entries in it using a loop. 2. **obj** * This script creates an empty object `obj` and sets 1 million properties on it using a loop. **Options Compared** In these benchmark cases, we're comparing two fundamental JavaScript data structures: 1. **Objects** (`obj`) 2. **Maps** (`map`) The main difference between the two is how they store and retrieve values. * Objects use key-value pairs stored in an array-like structure. * Maps use a hash table (a data structure that stores key-value pairs in a way that allows for efficient lookup, insertion, and deletion of elements). **Pros and Cons** Here's a brief summary of the pros and cons of each approach: **Objects** Pros: * Easier to create and manipulate * More intuitive for developers familiar with traditional object-oriented programming Cons: * Less efficient for large datasets due to the overhead of array-like storage * May lead to slower performance when dealing with large amounts of data **Maps** Pros: * More efficient for large datasets, as they use a hash table that allows for faster lookups and insertions * Can handle duplicate keys (the value associated with each key is ignored in Maps) Cons: * Less intuitive for developers unfamiliar with traditional object-oriented programming * May require more code to set up and work with **Other Considerations** When deciding between objects and maps, consider the following factors: * What type of data are you working with? If it's a large dataset with unique identifiers (keys), a map might be a better choice. If you're working with traditional key-value pairs, an object might suffice. * Are you concerned about performance? In that case, a map is likely to be faster for large datasets. **Library and Special JS Features** In the provided benchmark cases, no specific libraries are used or special JavaScript features like async/await, Promises, or modern syntax (e.g., arrow functions) are employed. The focus is on comparing basic data structure performance. **Alternatives** If you're interested in exploring more microbenchmarks or alternatives to MeasureThat.net, consider the following options: * **jsperf**: A classic JavaScript benchmarking tool that allows users to compare the performance of different code snippets. * **Benchmark.js**: A popular, high-performance benchmarking library for Node.js and browser environments. * **BenchMarkU**: An online platform offering a wide range of microbenchmarks for various programming languages and platforms. I hope this explanation helps you understand what's being tested in these benchmark cases!
Related benchmarks:
somevfind
list includes vs set has
set has vs list includes
new Set vs set.clear()
incl/set
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?