Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Object Array Equality (Map-JSON.stringify + sort vs Multiple Loops)) v3
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
Map-JSON.stringify + Sort vs Multiple Loops
Created:
2 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
const longstr = generateRandomString(10000) var objArr1 = [{},{ a: 1, b: 2, c: 3, d: 4, e: 5, },{a:undefined},{longstr}] var objArr2 = [{},{longstr},{ a: 1, b: 2, c: 3, d: 4, e: 5, },{a:undefined}] function mapStringifySort($objArr1, $objArr2) { if ($objArr1.length!==$objArr2.length) return false $objArr1 = $objArr1.map(obj=>JSON.stringify(obj)).sort() $objArr2 = $objArr2.map(obj=>JSON.stringify(obj)).sort() for (let i=0; i<$objArr1.length; i++){ if($objArr1[i]!==$objArr2[i]) return false } return true } function multipleLoops($objArr1, $objArr2) { if ($objArr1.length!==$objArr2.length) return false const has = Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty let bArray, sArray, foundSArrayIdxs = {} if($objArr2.length>$objArr2.length) { bArray = $objArr2 sArray = $objArr1 } else { bArray = $objArr1 sArray = $objArr2 } return bArray.every(($obj1)=>{ let $obj1Keys = Object.keys($obj1) let $obj1Len = $obj1Keys.length return sArray.some(($obj2, sidx)=>{ if(foundSArrayIdxs[sidx]) return false for(let i=0; i<$obj1Keys.length; i++) { let key = $obj1Keys[i] if($obj2[key]!==$obj1[key]) { return false } if(!has.call($obj2,key)) { return false } } let found = $obj1Len===objectLength($obj2) if(found) { foundSArrayIdxs[sidx] = true } return found }) }) } function objectLength(obj) { let i = 0; for(let k in obj){ i++ } return i } function generateRandomString(length) { let result = ''; let characters = 'ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz0123456789'; let charactersLength = characters.length; for (let i = 0; i < length; i++) { result += characters.charAt(Math.floor(Math.random() * charactersLength)); } return result; }
Tests:
Map-JSON.stringify + Sort
for(let i=0; i<10000; i++) { console.log(mapStringifySort(objArr1,objArr2)) }
Multiple Loops
for(let i=0; i<10000; i++) { console.log(multipleLoops(objArr1,objArr2)) }
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Map-JSON.stringify + Sort
Multiple Loops
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
Run details:
(Test run date:
2 years ago
)
User agent:
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/121.0.0.0 Safari/537.36
Browser/OS:
Chrome 121 on Windows
View result in a separate tab
Embed
Embed Benchmark Result
Test name
Executions per second
Map-JSON.stringify + Sort
0.8 Ops/sec
Multiple Loops
1.8 Ops/sec
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
Let's dive into the world of JavaScript benchmarks! **Benchmark Definition:** The benchmark measures the performance of two approaches for comparing two arrays of objects: 1. **`mapStringifySort`**: This approach uses `JSON.stringify()` to convert each object in the array to a string, sorts both arrays, and then compares them element by element. 2. **`multipleLoops`**: This approach uses a more traditional loop-based approach to compare each object in one array with every object in the other array. **Options Compared:** The benchmark is comparing two options: 1. **`mapStringifySort`**: A concise and readable approach using `JSON.stringify()` and sorting. 2. **`multipleLoops`**: A more traditional loop-based approach. **Pros and Cons of Each Approach:** **`mapStringifySort`**: Pros: * Concise and readable code * Easy to understand and maintain Cons: * May be slower due to the overhead of `JSON.stringify()` and sorting * May not perform well with very large datasets or complex objects **`multipleLoops`**: Pros: * Can be faster for very large datasets or complex objects * Allows for more control over the comparison process Cons: * More verbose and harder to read * May require more expertise in JavaScript programming **Library Used:** None, as this benchmark is written from scratch. **Special JS Feature/Syntax:** No special features or syntax are used beyond standard JavaScript constructs. However, `Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty` is used in the `multipleLoops` implementation, which may be considered a less-than-ideal solution by some developers (as it uses the global `hasOwnProperty` method instead of a function call). **Other Considerations:** The benchmark's performance is sensitive to the size and complexity of the input data. As such, it's essential to consider factors like dataset size, object structure, and algorithmic complexity when choosing between these two approaches. In general, for simple use cases with small datasets, `mapStringifySort` may be a good choice due to its concise and readable nature. However, for more complex scenarios or larger datasets, `multipleLoops` might offer better performance. **Alternatives:** If you're interested in exploring alternative approaches, consider the following options: 1. **Using a library like Lodash**: Libraries like Lodash provide optimized functions for common tasks like object comparison, which can improve performance and readability. 2. **Utilizing modern JavaScript features**: Modern JavaScript features like `Symbol.toString()` or `JSON.stringify` with custom replacer functions might offer better performance or more concise code. 3. **Exploring specialized data structures**: Depending on the specific requirements of your use case, using specialized data structures like a quadtree or a spatial hash table might provide significant performance improvements. I hope this explanation helps you understand the nuances of this benchmark!
Related benchmarks:
Array.prototype.concat vs spread operator big arrays
JavaScript spread operator vs Object.assign vs type-checked for-in loop performance
JavaScript spread operator vs Object.assign vs null-checked for-in loop performance
JavaScript spread operator vs Object.assign vs only-null-checked for-in loop performance
JavaScript spread operator vs Object.assign performance with 3 objects to merge fork
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?