Benchmark: Array + map vs array iteration

Script Preparation code:

var obj = {"one": true, "two": true, "three": true, "four": true, "five": true, "six": true, "seven": true, "eight": true, "nine": true, "ten": true};
var map = new Map([["one", true], ["two", true], ["three", true], ["four", true], ["five", true], ["six", true], ["seven", true], ["eight", true], ["nine", true], ["ten", true]]);

var arr = ["one", "two", "three", "four", "five", "six", "seven", "eight", "nine", "ten"];
var set = new Set(["one", "two", "three", "four", "five", "six", "seven", "eight", "nine", "ten"]);

Tests:

Array Iteration + Map iteration
for (const element of arr) { void(map.get(element)); }
Map Iteration
for (const element of map) { void(element); }
Array iteration
for (const element of arr) { void(element); }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Array Iteration + Map iteration
Map Iteration
Array iteration

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 dive into the provided benchmark definition and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Definition**

The test compares three different approaches to iterate over an array and access values in a `Map` object:

1. **Array Iteration + Map iteration**: Iterate over the array using `for...of`, then iterate over the map using another `for...of`.
2. **Map Iteration**: Iterate directly over the keys of the `Map` object using `for...of`.
3. **Array Iteration**: Simply iterate over the elements of the array using `for...of`.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares these three approaches to measure their performance differences.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach:**

* **Array Iteration + Map iteration**:
	+ Pros: Allows for explicit control over iterations, which can be beneficial for complex logic.
	+ Cons: May introduce unnecessary overhead due to the additional iteration.
* **Map Iteration**:
	+ Pros: Efficiently iterates over keys without indexing or accessing values directly.
	+ Cons: Does not provide direct access to map values, requiring an extra step (e.g., using `map.get()`).
* **Array Iteration**:
	+ Pros: Simple and straightforward, with no additional overhead.
	+ Cons: May require explicit iteration over the entire array, which can be slower.

**Library Used**

The benchmark uses the built-in `Map` object in JavaScript to store key-value pairs. The purpose of using a `Map` is to demonstrate how iterating over its keys affects performance.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

None mentioned explicitly, but it's worth noting that `for...of` loops are a relatively recent addition to JavaScript (introduced in ECMAScript 2015). They provide a concise way to iterate over arrays and other iterable objects.

**Alternatives**

To run similar benchmarks, you could try using different programming languages or libraries. For example:

* Python: Use built-in `map()` functions or iterate over keys of a dictionary.
* Java/Scala: Iterate over collections using `foreach` loops or `Iterator` interfaces.
* C/C++: Use standard library functions like `std::map::iterator` or `std::foreach`.

Keep in mind that the specific implementation and results may vary depending on the programming language, platform, and hardware.

The provided benchmark definition provides a straightforward example to illustrate performance differences between iterating over arrays and maps. By using this benchmark, developers can compare their own code's efficiency with these different approaches.

Related benchmarks:

Array + map vs array iteration (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Array Iteration + Map iteration vs Map Iteration vs Array iteration

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Array Iteration + Map iteration

Map Iteration

Array iteration

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):