Benchmark: zargazrgzragzra - MeasureThat.net

Tests:

obj
const obj = { lorem: 0, dolor: 2 } if (typeof obj['lorem'] === 'number') { console.log('ok') }
arr
const obj = ['lorem', 'dolor'] if (obj.includes('lorem')) { console.log('ok') }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
obj
arr

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.

I'll break down the provided benchmark information and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Definition**

The provided JSON represents a benchmark definition, which is a JavaScript code snippet that defines a test case. There are two benchmark definitions:

1. "obj":
```javascript
const obj = {
  lorem: 0,
  dolor: 2
}
if (typeof obj['lorem'] === 'number') {
  console.log('ok')
}
```
This test case checks if the value of `obj.lorem` is a number.

2. "arr":
```javascript
const obj = ['lorem', 'dolor']
if (obj.includes('lorem')) {
  console.log('ok')
}
```
This test case checks if the string `'lorem'` is included in the array `obj`.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares two options:

1. **Using property access (`typeof obj['lorem'] === 'number')**: This option uses the property access syntax to check if a value is a number.
2. **Using array method (`obj.includes('lorem')`)**: This option uses the `includes()` method on the array `obj` to check if a string is present.

**Pros and Cons**

**Option 1 (Property Access):**

Pros:

* More explicit and readable
* Can be faster for large objects

Cons:

* Can be slower for small objects due to the overhead of property access
* May not work as expected in some edge cases (e.g., if the object has a non-enumerable property)

**Option 2 (Array Method):**

Pros:

* Faster for large arrays or strings
* More concise and readable

Cons:

* Less explicit and may be less readable for those familiar with property access
* May not work as expected in some edge cases (e.g., if the array contains non-string elements)

**Library/Utility Used**

None of the provided benchmark definitions use a library or utility. However, it's worth noting that `includes()` method is a standard JavaScript method introduced in ECMAScript 2019.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

There are no special features or syntax used in these benchmark definitions. They appear to be simple and straightforward tests using basic JavaScript constructs.

**Other Alternatives**

If you wanted to test these same options on other browsers or platforms, you could use other benchmarking tools or libraries, such as:

* Browser-specific testing frameworks (e.g., Chrome DevTools' Benchmarking API)
* General-purpose benchmarking libraries (e.g., jsperf, Benchmark.js)

However, MeasureThat.net seems to provide a tailored solution for JavaScript microbenchmarks, allowing users to easily define and compare test cases across different browsers and platforms.

Related benchmarks:

zargazrgzragzra (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: obj vs arr

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

obj

arr

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):