Benchmark: TestingK1 - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

testObj = [{
        id: 1,
        text: 'Bro'
    },
    {
        id: 2,
        text: 'Apple'
    },
    {
        id: 3,
        text: 'Sun'
    }
]

obj = {
    id: 3,
    text: 'Sun'
}

Tests:

indexOf
index = testObj.indexOf(obj) obj.text = 'Lion' testObj[index] = obj
map
testObj = testObj.map((o) => o.id === obj.id ? {...o, text: obj.text} : o)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
indexOf
map

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 data and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Definition**

The `Script Preparation Code` section defines an initial JavaScript object `testObj` containing three elements with `id` and `text` properties. Another object `obj` is defined with similar properties, but different values for `id` (3) and `text`. The script then uses these objects in a specific context.

**Individual Test Cases**

There are two test cases:

1. **indexOf**: This test case measures the performance of the `indexOf()` method on the `testObj` array. It first finds the index of the object with `id` equal to 3 using `indexOf()`, then updates the text property of that element and assigns it back to the original `testObj[index]`. The goal is to understand how efficient JavaScript arrays are in searching for a specific element.
2. **map**: This test case measures the performance of the `map()` method on the `testObj` array. It creates a new array by mapping each element in `testObj` to an object with updated properties, including the `text` property from `obj`. The objective is to evaluate how efficient JavaScript arrays are when performing transformations and creating new elements.

**Library Usage**

There's no explicit library usage mentioned in the provided JSON data. However, it's worth noting that some JavaScript environments or browsers might provide additional libraries or APIs that could be used in a benchmarking scenario. In this case, the focus seems to be on basic JavaScript array operations.

**Special JS Features or Syntax**

The test cases don't explicitly use any special JavaScript features or syntax. The `indexOf()` and `map()` methods are standard JavaScript Array methods, and no additional libraries or polyfills seem necessary for their execution. If there's an assumption about a specific environment or browser that requires the use of certain features, it's not evident from the provided data.

**Other Alternatives**

If you were to consider alternative approaches or test cases, here are a few possibilities:

* **Array.prototype.forEach()**: Instead of `indexOf()` and `map()`, you could measure the performance of these methods using `forEach()`. This would allow for a more comprehensive understanding of JavaScript array operations.
* **Object-oriented programming (OOP) alternatives**: You might consider testing the performance of similar operations on objects, such as using `hasOwnProperty()` instead of `indexOf()`.
* **More complex data structures**: If you wanted to explore more advanced scenarios, you could test the performance of array operations on more complex data structures, like nested arrays or sparse arrays.

**Pros and Cons**

Here are some pros and cons associated with each approach:

1. **`indexOf()` and `map()` methods**:
	* Pros: Simple, widely supported, and easy to implement.
	* Cons: May not be the best choice for very large datasets or performance-critical applications.
2. **`forEach()` method**:
	* Pros: Can handle larger datasets more efficiently than `indexOf()` and `map()`.
	* Cons: May require more setup and understanding of the iteration process.

Ultimately, the specific approach chosen depends on the goals of the benchmarking scenario and the requirements of the target audience.

Related benchmarks:

TestingK1 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: indexOf vs map

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

indexOf

map

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):