Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Map lookup or in operator
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
lookup vs in
Created:
3 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
map = { qwerty: 1, asdfgh: 2, zxcvbn: 3, poiuyt: 4, lkjhgf: 5, mnbvcx: 6, dfuehg: 7, xzcuow: 8, lfghie: 9 }
Tests:
lookup
let a = map['qwerty'] let b = map['xzcuow'] let c = map['aopfig']
in
let a = 'qwerty' in map let b = 'xzcuow' in map let c = 'aopfig' in map
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
lookup
in
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 break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested. **Benchmark Definition** The benchmark is defined in two parts: `Script Preparation Code` and `Html Preparation Code`. The former provides a JavaScript object `map` that contains various key-value pairs. The latter is empty, indicating that no HTML preparation code is needed for this specific benchmark. **Options Compared** Two options are being compared: 1. **Map lookup using the bracket notation (`[]`)**: This involves accessing a value in the `map` object by its key using the square bracket syntax (`let a = map['qwerty']`, etc.). 2. **Map lookup using the `in` operator**: This involves checking if a key exists in the `map` object and then accessing the corresponding value using the `in` operator (`let a = 'qwerty' in map`, etc.). **Pros and Cons** 1. **Map lookup with bracket notation**: * Pros: Direct access to values, efficient, and concise. * Cons: May not work well if keys are not unique (e.g., multiple values with the same key). 2. **Map lookup with `in` operator**: * Pros: Handles cases where keys may not be present in the object, provides a way to check existence before accessing value. * Cons: Less efficient than direct bracket notation access, as it involves an additional operation (key existence check). **Library and Purpose** No external libraries are mentioned in the benchmark definition. The `map` object is created programmatically using JavaScript. **Special JS Feature or Syntax** The benchmark utilizes a modern feature called "template literals" (`'\r\n'` in `Script Preparation Code`). Template literals allow you to embed expressions inside string literals, which can be useful for creating complex string concatenations. **Other Alternatives** If you're interested in exploring alternative approaches, here are a few options: 1. **Using the `hasOwnProperty()` method**: Instead of using the `in` operator, you could use `map.hasOwnProperty('key')` to check if a key exists in the object. 2. **Using the `Object.keys()` method**: You could iterate over the keys of the `map` object using `Object.keys(map)` and then access values using array indexing (`map[0]`, etc.). 3. **Using a custom implementation**: Depending on your performance requirements, you might consider implementing a custom lookup mechanism that optimizes for your specific use case. Keep in mind that these alternatives may have different trade-offs in terms of efficiency, readability, and maintainability.
Related benchmarks:
Inverted map lookup vs. dynamic map lookup
Inverted map lookup vs. dynamic map lookup vs. Set1
Map vs switch soh
.includes vs mass compare vs lookup
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?