Benchmark: weakmap vs object properties

Tests:

weakmap
const map = new WeakMap() const key = { aa:123 } const value = { bb:321 } map.set(key,value) map.get(key)
object properties
const key = { aa:123 } key._value = { bb:321 } void key._value

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
weakmap
object properties

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 3 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/133.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 133 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
weakmap	31717950.0 Ops/sec
object properties	167250752.0 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 7 months ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared, and other considerations.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark measures the performance difference between two approaches: using `WeakMap` and accessing properties directly on objects in JavaScript.

**WeakMap vs Object Properties**

In the benchmark, two test cases are defined:

1. **WeakMap**: The script creates a new `WeakMap` instance, sets an object (`key`) as the key and another object (`value`) as the value, and then retrieves the value using the same key.
2. **Object Properties**: In this approach, the script creates an object (`key`) with a non-standard property `_value`, assigns a value to it, and then deletes the value.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares the performance of these two approaches:

1. **WeakMap**: Using a `WeakMap` to store key-value pairs.
2. **Object Properties**: Accessing properties directly on objects using dot notation (`key._value`).

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

1. **WeakMap**:
	* Pros:
		+ Weak references ensure that the garbage collector can release memory occupied by keys when they are no longer in use.
		+ Can provide better performance due to faster lookup and access times compared to object property lookups.
	* Cons:
		+ Requires additional setup and may be less intuitive for developers familiar with object property syntax.
2. **Object Properties**:
	* Pros:
		+ More familiar and widely adopted syntax, making it easier to understand and maintain code.
		+ No additional setup required.
	* Cons:
		+ Performance is typically slower due to the need to access properties using dot notation or bracket notation.

**Other Considerations**

1. **Library Usage**: Neither of these approaches uses a specific library. However, if you were to compare a `WeakMap` approach with one that used an external library like Lodash's `memoize` function, it would likely be more efficient and convenient.
2. **Special JS Feature or Syntax**: This benchmark does not use any special JavaScript features or syntax.

**Alternative Approaches**

If you wanted to measure the performance of other approaches, consider:

1. Using a different data structure like an array or a set.
2. Comparing multiple libraries or frameworks (e.g., React vs Vue.js).
3. Exploring different optimization techniques, such as memoization or caching.
4. Analyzing performance under specific conditions, like concurrent execution or large datasets.

Keep in mind that benchmarking is an ongoing process, and results may vary depending on the specific use case, hardware, and software configurations.

Related benchmarks:

weakmap vs object properties (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: weakmap vs object properties

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

weakmap

object properties

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 7 months ago):