Benchmark: Map bs Obj - MeasureThat.net

Tests:

Map
const mp = new Map([[1, ""],[2, ""],[3, ""],[4, ""],[5, ""],[0, ""],]); for (let i = 0; i < 10000; i++) { return mp.get(i%5) }
Obj
const ob = {0:"",1:"",2:"",3:"",4:"",5:""} for (let i = 0; i < 10000; i++) { return ob[i%5] }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Map
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):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll break down the explanation into smaller sections to make it easier to understand.

**Benchmark Overview**

MeasureThat.net is a website that allows users to create and run JavaScript microbenchmarks. The provided JSON represents two benchmark tests: "Map" and "Obj".

**Test Cases**

The test cases are small code snippets that aim to measure the performance of different approaches. There are two test cases:

1. **Map**: This test case uses a `Map` object to store key-value pairs. The benchmark definition is:
```
const mp = new Map([[1, ""], [2, ""], [3, "", 4], [5, ""]]);
for (let i = 0; i < 10000; i++) {
  return mp.get(i % 5);
}
```
This test case iterates over the `Map` object 10,000 times, retrieving a value using the `get()` method.

2. **Obj**: This test case uses an object literal to store key-value pairs. The benchmark definition is:
```
const ob = {0: "", 1: "", 2: "", 3: "", 4: ""};
for (let i = 0; i < 10000; i++) {
  return ob[i % 5];
}
```
This test case iterates over the object literal 10,000 times, retrieving a value using the `[]` syntax.

**Options Compared**

The two test cases compare different approaches to accessing values in an array/object:

1. **Using a Map**: The "Map" test case uses a `Map` object, which provides constant time complexity for `get()` operations.
2. **Using an Object Literal**: The "Obj" test case uses an object literal, which requires indexing into the array using square brackets (`[]`) to access values.

**Pros and Cons**

Here are some pros and cons of each approach:

* **Map**: Pros:
	+ Constant time complexity for `get()` operations
	+ Can handle arbitrary keys (not just integers)
	+ May be more memory-efficient
* **Object Literal**: Pros:
	+ Easier to read and write code
	+ No need to create a separate object or map instance
* **Map**:
	+ May have overhead due to creating a new `Map` object
	+ Requires importing the `Map` class

**Libraries and Special Features**

There is no library used in these benchmark test cases. However, it's worth noting that JavaScript objects are not typically considered "first-class citizens" like arrays or maps.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

None of the test cases use any special JavaScript features or syntax beyond what's standard in modern JavaScript (ES2015+).

**Other Alternatives**

For a more extensive benchmarking comparison, you may want to consider adding other approaches, such as:

* Using an array literal with indexing
* Using a `Set` object
* Using a custom data structure designed for this specific use case

Keep in mind that these alternatives would likely require significant changes to the benchmark code and test setup.

Overall, the "Map" and "Obj" test cases provide a simple comparison of accessing values in an array/object using different approaches.

Related benchmarks:

Map bs Obj (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Map vs Obj

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Map

Obj

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):