Benchmark: test getting diff keys

Script Preparation code:

var record1 = {
  1: '1',
  2: '1',
  3: '1',
  4: '1',
  5: '1',
  6: '1',
  7: '1',
}

var record2 = {
  1: '1',
  2: '1',
  3: '1',
  4: '1',
  5: '1',
  6: '1',
  8: '1',
}

var getFieldsDiffList = (record1, record2) => {
  const firstRecordFields = Object.keys(record1);
  const newRecordFields = Object.keys(record2);
  return newRecordFields.filter((item) => !firstRecordFields.includes(item));
}

var getFieldsDiffSet = (record1, record2) => {
  const firstRecordFields = new Set(Object.keys(record1));
  const newRecordFields = Object.keys(record2);
  return newRecordFields.filter((item) => !firstRecordFields.has(item));
}

Tests:

list
getFieldsDiffList(record1, record2)
set
getFieldsDiffSet(record1, record2)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
list
set

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 provided JSON benchmark definition and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Definition:**

The benchmark measures the performance of two functions:

1. `getFieldsDiffList(record1, record2)`: This function takes two objects `record1` and `record2` as input and returns an array of keys present in `record2` but not in `record1`.
2. `getFieldsDiffSet(record1, record2)`: This function is similar to the previous one, but instead of returning an array, it returns a set of keys.

**Options compared:**

The two options being compared are:

* `list`: Returns an array of keys using `Array.prototype.filter()`.
* `set`: Returns a set of keys using `Set`.

**Pros and Cons:**

* **`getFieldsDiffList(list)`**: 
	+ Pros:
		- Simple and straightforward implementation.
	+ Cons:
		- Uses `Array.prototype.filter()`, which may have some overhead due to the need for bounds checking and iteration.
		- Returns an array, which can lead to unnecessary memory allocation and copying.
* **`getFieldsDiffSet(set)`**:
	+ Pros:
		- More efficient than using `Array.prototype.filter()` since sets provide constant-time lookup and insertion operations.
		- Avoids unnecessary memory allocation and copying by returning a set directly.
	+ Cons:
		- Requires creating a new set, which may incur some overhead due to object creation and initialization.

**Library usage:**

Neither function uses any external libraries. The `Object.keys()` method is used to get the keys of the input objects, and the `Set` class is used in the `getFieldsDiffSet` implementation.

**Special JS feature or syntax:**

There are no special JS features or syntax used in this benchmark. Both functions rely on basic JavaScript operations and data structures (arrays, sets).

**Other alternatives:**

If you want to explore other approaches, here are a few ideas:

1. **Use `Object.keys()` with a for...of loop**: Instead of using `Array.prototype.filter()`, you could use a simple `for...of` loop to iterate over the keys and filter out duplicates.
2. **Use a library like Lodash**: If you prefer a more concise implementation, you could use a utility function from a library like Lodash that provides a `differenceBy()` method for filtering arrays.
3. **Use a more efficient data structure**: Depending on the specific requirements of your application, you might consider using a different data structure, such as a trie or a hash table, to store and query the keys.

Overall, the choice between `getFieldsDiffList(list)` and `getFieldsDiffSet(set)` depends on your performance priorities and the specific requirements of your use case. The `set` implementation is generally more efficient, but may incur some overhead due to object creation.

Related benchmarks:

test getting diff keys (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: list vs set

Created: 3 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

list

set

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):