Benchmark: Object key access vs array find2

Script Preparation code:

var items = Array.from(Array(1000), (_,x) => ({key: x, value: x*10}));

var objContainer = {};
var arrContainer = [];

for (let i = 100; i >= 0; i--) {
  const index = Math.floor(Math.random() * 1000);
  const item = items[index];
  objContainer[item.key] = item;
  arrContainer.push(item)
}

Tests:

Object access
items.forEach(item => objContainer[item.value])
Array find
items.forEach(item => arrContainer[item.value])

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Object access
Array find

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 benchmark and its results.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark, called "Object key access vs array find2", tests the speed of accessing an object by its key versus finding an element in an array using the `find2` method. The script generates a large dataset of objects with unique keys and values, and then creates two containers: an object container (`objContainer`) and an array container (`arrContainer`). For each iteration, it randomly selects an index from the dataset, retrieves the corresponding object or array element, and stores it in either `objContainer` or `arrContainer`. This process is repeated for a total of 100 iterations.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares two approaches:

1. **Object Access**: Using the bracket notation (`objContainer[item.key]`) to access an object by its key.
2. **Array Find**: Using the `find2` method (not a standard JavaScript method) to find an element in an array based on its value.

**Pros and Cons**

*   **Object Access**
    *   Pros:
        *   Cache-friendly, as the property name is stored in memory.
        *   Can be faster due to the optimized bracket notation used by most browsers.
    *   Cons:
        *   May require more memory allocation for each iteration (depending on the object's properties).
*   **Array Find**
    *   Pros:
        *   No additional memory allocation required for each iteration.
    *   Cons:
        *   Not a standard JavaScript method, which may lead to inconsistent results across browsers.
        *   May require more CPU cycles due to the search algorithm used by `find2`.

**Library and Its Purpose**

In this benchmark, there is no explicit library being used. However, the `Array.from` method is used to create an array of objects from a repeated value, which is a built-in JavaScript function.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

There is no special JavaScript feature or syntax being used in this benchmark, aside from the `find2` method which is not a standard JavaScript method. The use of `find2` may be specific to certain browsers or implementations.

**Alternatives**

If you want to test similar benchmarks using alternative methods or libraries, here are some suggestions:

*   **Using the `in` operator**: Instead of bracket notation, you can access an object property using the `in` operator (e.g., `objContainer[item.key] in objContainer`).
*   **Using `Array.prototype.indexOf()`**: You can use `indexOf()` to find an element in an array based on its value.
*   **Using a different data structure**: If you want to explore other performance characteristics, consider using a different data structure like a hash table or a trie.

Keep in mind that the results of these alternative approaches may vary depending on the specific browser and implementation being used.

Related benchmarks:

Object key access vs array find2 (version: 0)

Test speed of object access by key vs array find to find object

Comparing performance of: Object access vs Array find

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Object access

Array find

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):