Benchmark: Return result from Switch vs Object Literal

Script Preparation code:

var str = 'abc';
str = str.charAt(Math.floor(Math.random() * 3));

var count = 10;

Tests:

Switch
function getValue(str, count) { switch (str) { case 'a': return 'A'.repeat(count); case 'b': return 'B'.repeat(count); case 'c': return 'C'.repeat(count); } } var result = getValue(str, count); console.log(result);
Object Literal
var objLiteral = { a: () => 'A'.repeat(count), b: () => 'B'.repeat(count), c: () => 'C'.repeat(count) } var result = objLiteral[str](); console.log(result);

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:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/131.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 131 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Switch	508310.8 Ops/sec
Object Literal	469695.2 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks!

**Benchmark Definition**

The provided JSON represents a benchmark test that compares the performance of two approaches: `switch` and object literal notation for accessing an array of repeated strings.

The benchmark definition consists of:

* A script preparation code snippet, which:
	+ Defines a variable `str` with a random character value (either 'a', 'b', or 'c') and assigns it to the `charAt()` method.
	+ Sets the initial value of `count` to 10.
* An HTML preparation code snippet is empty in this case.

The benchmark definition also includes two individual test cases:

1. **Switch**: This test case defines a function `getValue(str, count)` that uses a `switch` statement to return repeated strings based on the input character. The `str`, `count`, and `console.log()` statements are passed as arguments.
2. **Object Literal**: This test case defines an object `objLiteral` with three properties: `a`, `b`, and `c`, each of which returns a repeated string using an arrow function. The property to access is determined by the input character.

**Comparison Options**

The two comparison options are:

1. **Switch**: Uses a `switch` statement to access the array of repeated strings.
2. **Object Literal**: Uses object notation with bracket notation (`objLiteral[str]`) to access the desired property.

Let's examine the pros and cons of each approach:

**Switch**

Pros:

* Simple and readable syntax
* Easy to understand for developers familiar with `switch` statements

Cons:

* May involve slower lookups due to the nature of the `switch` statement (e.g., jumping tables)
* May not perform well with large datasets or dynamic property names

**Object Literal**

Pros:

* Fast and efficient access using bracket notation
* Can handle arbitrary property names and values

Cons:

* Less readable syntax, especially for developers unfamiliar with object notation
* Requires additional memory allocation for the object property

**Library Usage**

In the Object Literal test case, the `array.prototype.repeat()` method is used to repeat the strings. This method is a part of the modern JavaScript standard library (`Array.prototype.repeat()`) and provides an efficient way to create repeated arrays.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

There are no special features or syntaxes explicitly mentioned in this benchmark, but it's worth noting that modern JavaScript features like `let`, `const`, and arrow functions are used extensively throughout the benchmark.

Related benchmarks:

Return result from Switch vs Object Literal (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Switch vs Object Literal

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Switch

Object Literal

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):