Benchmark: Test push spread map big

Script Preparation code:

var map1 = new Map(Array.from({ length: 1000 }, (_, index) => [`key${index}`, `value${index}`]));
var map2 =new Map(Array.from({ length: 1000 }, (_, index) => [`key${index + 1000}`, `value${index + 1000}`]));

Tests:

spread
const keysFromMap1 = Array.from(map1.keys()); const keysFromMap2 = Array.from(map2.keys()); // Concatenate keys from both maps const allKeys = [...keysFromMap1, ...keysFromMap2]; console.log(allKeys);
push
const allKeys = []; // Add keys from map1 to allKeys for (const key of map1.keys()) { allKeys.push(key); } // Add keys from map2 to allKeys for (const key of map2.keys()) { allKeys.push(key); } console.log(allKeys);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
spread
push

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 explain what is being tested.

**Benchmark Overview**

The test measures the performance of two approaches to concatenate keys from two Maps in JavaScript: using `Array.from()` with spread operator (`...`) and using loops (`push()`).

**Script Preparation Code**

The script preparation code creates two identical Map objects, `map1` and `map2`, each containing 1000 key-value pairs. The keys for `map1` are sequential numbers from 0 to 999, while the keys for `map2` start at 1001.

**Individual Test Cases**

There are two test cases:

1. **"spread"`**: This test case uses `Array.from()` with spread operator (`...`) to concatenate the keys of both Maps.
2. **"push"`**: This test case uses loops to iterate over the keys of each Map and add them to an array using `push()`.

**Library Used**

The test cases use the built-in `Map` object, which is a part of the JavaScript standard library. The purpose of a Map is to store key-value pairs in a way that allows for efficient lookup, insertion, and deletion of keys.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

1. **"spread"` (Array.from() with spread operator):
	* Pros:
		+ Concise and expressive code
		+ Fast execution performance
	* Cons:
		+ May not work as expected if the input arrays are large or have a large number of duplicate values
2. **"push"` (Loops):
	* Pros:
		+ Robust and fault-tolerant, handling edge cases well
		+ Can be used with other data structures besides Maps
	* Cons:
		+ Less concise and less expressive code
		+ May have slower execution performance due to loop overhead

**Other Considerations**

* The test uses a relatively small number of keys (1000) for each Map, which may not accurately reflect real-world performance scenarios. Larger datasets might reveal differences in performance.
* The test only measures the time taken to concatenate the keys and does not account for any additional operations that might be performed on the resulting array or Map.

**Alternatives**

If you're interested in exploring alternative approaches, here are a few options:

1. **Using `for...of` loops**: Instead of using arrays, you can use `for...of` loops to iterate over the keys of each Map.
2. **Using `reduce()`**: You can use `reduce()` to concatenate the keys from both Maps in a single pass.
3. **Using third-party libraries or utilities**: There are several JavaScript libraries and utilities available that provide optimized implementations for concatenating arrays or objects, such as Lodash or Ramda.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may introduce additional dependencies or complexity, so be sure to evaluate their trade-offs before deciding which approach to use.

Related benchmarks:

Test push spread map big (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: spread vs push

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

spread

push

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):