Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
MapvsObject-Get
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
Map vs Object
Created:
3 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Tests:
Map
const myMap = new Map() myMap .set('1', 'one') .set('Erick', { text: 'two' }) myMap.get('Erick')
Object
const ola = { '1': 'one', Erick: { text: 'two' } } ola.Erick
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Map
Object
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):
I'll break down the provided benchmark JSON and explain what's being tested, the options compared, pros and cons of each approach, library usage, special JS features, and other considerations. **Benchmark Overview** The `MapvsObject-Get` benchmark compares two approaches to accessing data stored in a Map (a JavaScript object that stores key-value pairs) versus an Object. The test cases are designed to measure the performance difference between these two data structures. **Options Compared** There are two options being compared: 1. **Accessing data from a `Map`**: In this approach, you access the value associated with a specific key using the `get()` method. 2. **Accessing nested data from an `Object`**: In this approach, you access a nested object property by traversing the object's hierarchy. **Pros and Cons** * **Map Approach** * Pros: * More efficient for large datasets, as Maps use hash-based lookups (O(1) average time complexity). * Less error-prone than Object traversal, as you don't need to worry about nested property names. * Cons: * May be less intuitive for accessing simple key-value pairs. * **Object Approach** * Pros: * More familiar and intuitive for accessing simple key-value pairs. * Easier to understand and predict the access time complexity (O(1) in the best case, but O(n) in the worst case due to property name resolution). * Cons: * Less efficient than Maps for large datasets, as objects use recursive lookup. **Library Usage** There is no explicit library usage in this benchmark. However, if you're using a browser's internal implementation or a third-party library that provides optimized data structures (e.g., `Map` or `Object` implementations), it might affect the performance results. **Special JS Features** None mentioned in the provided JSON. **Other Considerations** When testing these two approaches, consider the following factors: * **Data Size**: Larger datasets will favor the Map approach. * **Complexity of Data**: More complex data structures or nested properties may favor the Object approach due to its familiarity and predictability. * **Cache Efficiency**: The performance results might be affected by caching mechanisms implemented in the browsers or libraries used. **Alternatives** If you're interested in exploring alternative approaches, consider: * Using other data structures like `Set`, which provides a fast lookup time (O(1)) for elements with unique keys. * Implementing a custom data structure that combines aspects of Maps and Objects to suit your specific use case. Keep in mind that this benchmark is designed to compare two common approaches, not to evaluate the absolute best approach. Depending on your specific requirements, you may want to experiment with other data structures or techniques.
Related benchmarks:
Object access by key vs Map.get
Map vs Object getter
Key lookup using different methods.
Map vs object for deletions
Object vs Map getter/setter
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?