Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Array vs Class
(version: 0)
Checking whether it's faster to create an obj or array when mapping an array to a standardized shape
Comparing performance of:
Array vs Obj
Created:
2 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
window.data = new Array(1000).fill(0).map(() => [Math.random(), Math.random(), Math.random()]);
Tests:
Array
data.map(([c,b,a]) => [a, b, c]).map(([,b]) => b);
Obj
data.map(([c,b,a]) => ({a,b,c})).map(({b}) => b);
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Array
Obj
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):
The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark test on the MeasureThat.net website. **What is tested?** The benchmark tests two approaches to map an array of objects to a standardized shape: using arrays and using classes (objects). **Options compared:** There are two options being compared: 1. **Arrays**: Using an array as the output shape for mapping, where each element in the array represents a single object. 2. **Classes/Objects**: Using a class or object as the output shape for mapping, where each property of the object corresponds to a field in the mapped data. **Pros and Cons:** * **Arrays**: + Pros: - Easier to work with when dealing with simple data structures. - Can be more efficient in terms of memory usage, as each element in the array is a separate object. + Cons: - May not provide a clear or intuitive structure for complex data, making it harder to understand and work with. * **Classes/Objects**: + Pros: - Provides a clear and structured way to represent complex data, making it easier to understand and work with. - Can be more efficient in terms of processing time, as the interpreter can optimize operations on objects. + Cons: - May require additional boilerplate code for setup and initialization. - Can be slower than using arrays due to the overhead of object creation and manipulation. **Library:** There is no specific library used in this benchmark. The test cases use built-in JavaScript features. **Special JS feature/syntax:** None mentioned, but note that some modern browsers support classes (objects) out of the box, while older browsers may require additional polyfills or workarounds to access these features. **Benchmark Preparation Code Explanation:** The preparation code creates an array of 1000 objects, each with three random properties (a, b, and c). This array is then mapped twice: 1. First mapping uses arrays as the output shape, where each element in the array represents a single object. 2. Second mapping uses classes/objects as the output shape, where each property of the object corresponds to a field in the mapped data. **Alternative Approaches:** Other approaches could include using tuples or other structured data types instead of arrays or objects. For example, using `Map` or `Set` data structures for efficient key-value or value storage. In terms of performance optimization, some benchmarks might explore alternative data structures like: * **Sparse arrays**: Using a sparse array to reduce memory usage. * **Data views**: Using data views to optimize array-like operations. * **Native WebAssembly**: Compiling JavaScript benchmarks to WebAssembly for native execution on the CPU or GPU. However, these approaches would likely require significant changes to the benchmark test cases and preparation code.
Related benchmarks:
Array.from() vs new Array() performance...
new Array() vs Array.from() with random data
Array.from() vs new Array().map()
Array Spread vs Fill vs New Array
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?