Benchmark: Nathanjamals sorting test

Tests:

obj and array methods
const FACET_PRIORITY = ['trim', 'body', 'color', 'fueltype', 'cc', 'gearbox', 'seats', 'doors']; const descriptorParts = { trim: 'S Line', color: 'beiges', doors: '5 door' }; const descriptorOrdered = ['audi A1']; const sortedExtraFacets = Object.keys(descriptorParts) .sort((a, b) => FACET_PRIORITY.indexOf(a) - FACET_PRIORITY.indexOf(b)) .map((key) => descriptorParts[key]); return [...descriptorOrdered,...sortedExtraFacets];
old school
const FACET_PRIORITY = ['trim', 'body', 'color', 'fueltype', 'cc', 'gearbox', 'seats', 'doors']; const descriptorParts = { trim: 'S Line', color: 'beiges', doors: '5 door' }; const descriptorOrdered = ['audi A1']; for (const facetKey of FACET_PRIORITY) { if (descriptorParts[facetKey]) { descriptorOrdered.push(descriptorParts[facetKey]); } } return descriptorOrdered;

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
obj and array methods
old school

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/126.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 126 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
obj and array methods	4517249.0 Ops/sec
old school	11701103.0 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll break down the provided benchmark JSON and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Definition**

The `benchmark definition` is an object that describes the test case. In this case, there are two test cases:

1. "obj and array methods"
2. "old school"

**Test Cases**

Let's analyze each test case:

### obj and array methods

This test case uses JavaScript objects and arrays. The benchmark definition includes:

* `descriptorParts`: an object with string values (e.g., "S Line", "beiges")
* `FACET_PRIORITY`: an array of strings that defines the order of sorting
* `descriptorOrdered`: an array that initially contains a single value ("audi A1")
* The test code sorts the keys of `descriptorParts` based on their index in `FACET_PRIORITY`, maps each key to its corresponding value, and then pushes these values onto `descriptorOrdered`

The goal is to measure how quickly this code executes.

**Pros and Cons**

Using an object with a sorted array of keys can be efficient because it allows for fast lookups and sorting. However, the use of `Object.keys()` and `sort()` might incur additional overhead due to the way JavaScript handles objects and arrays.

In contrast, the "old school" approach uses a simple `for` loop to iterate over the `FACET_PRIORITY` array and push values onto `descriptorOrdered`. This approach can be faster in certain cases because it avoids the overhead of object methods like `sort()`.

**Old School Approach**

The "old school" approach is likely using an older JavaScript syntax, possibly from a previous version or a specific library. In this case, it's using a `for...of` loop to iterate over the array and push values onto the `descriptorOrdered` array.

This approach can be faster because it:

* Avoids the overhead of creating an object with a sorted array of keys
* Uses a simple iteration that doesn't involve object methods like `sort()`
* Is likely to be more efficient in terms of memory usage

However, this approach may not work as expected if the input data is large or complex.

**Library and Special JS Features**

There are no libraries mentioned in the benchmark definition. However, some JavaScript features might be used:

* `Object.keys()` and `sort()`: built-in JavaScript methods
* `for...of` loop: a feature introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6)

The "old school" approach uses a feature that is no longer supported in modern browsers.

**Other Alternatives**

If the benchmark author wants to compare other approaches, they could consider adding more test cases with different algorithms or data structures. For example:

* Using an array of objects instead of an object with sorted keys
* Using a different sorting algorithm, such as quicksort or mergesort
* Adding noise or randomness to the input data to simulate real-world scenarios

Some possible alternatives for the "obj and array methods" test case could be:

* Using a `Set` instead of an object to store unique values
* Using a more efficient sorting algorithm like heap sort or radix sort
* Adding randomization to the input data to simulate varying performance characteristics

Related benchmarks:

Nathanjamals sorting test (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: obj and array methods vs old school

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

obj and array methods

old school

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):