Benchmark: Sort vs ToSorted 222

Script Preparation code:

const element = [{foo: 100}, {foo:200}, {foo: 50}]

Tests:

sort
const element = [{foo: 100}, {foo:200}, {foo: 50}, {foo: 20}, {foo: 90}] const result = element.sort((a,b) => a.foo - b.foo)
toSorted
const element = [{foo: 100}, {foo:200}, {foo: 50}, {foo: 20}, {foo: 90}] const result = element.toSorted((a,b) => a.foo - b.foo)

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 14 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 14 runs

sort

10.9M/s

toSorted

9.1M/s

Fastest: sort (1.2x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ sort: 10,890,575 ops/sec
• toSorted: 9,146,479 ops/sec

Results show median performance across all community submissions. Run this benchmark yourself to verify on your device.

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
sort
toSorted

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/149.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 149 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

sort

51.8M/s

toSorted

9.1M/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ sort	51,830,040 Ops/sec
toSorted	9,141,382 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model gpt-4o-mini, generated one year ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

The benchmark you provided tests the performance of two different ways to sort an array of objects in JavaScript, specifically comparing the `sort` method and the `toSorted` method. Here’s a detailed breakdown:

### Benchmark Overview
- **Name**: Sort vs ToSorted 222
- **Description**: A test aimed at measuring performance differences between two sorting approaches.
- **Input Data**: The data being sorted consists of an array of objects with a single property `foo` that holds numeric values, making them suitable for comparing based on this property.

### Test Cases
1. **Sort Method**:
   - **Benchmark Definition**: `const element = [{foo: 100}, {foo:200}, {foo: 50}, {foo: 20}, {foo: 90}]` followed by `const result = element.sort((a,b) => a.foo - b.foo)`
   - **Test Name**: “sort”
   - **Purpose**: This method sorts the original array in place and returns the sorted array. The comparator function `(a,b) => a.foo - b.foo` sorts the elements based on the `foo` property in ascending order.

2. **ToSorted Method**:
   - **Benchmark Definition**: `const element = [{foo: 100}, {foo:200}, {foo: 50}, {foo: 20}, {foo: 90}]` followed by `const result = element.toSorted((a,b) => a.foo - b.foo)`
   - **Test Name**: “toSorted”
   - **Purpose**: The `toSorted` method is a newer addition to the JavaScript language. It does not mutate the original array but instead returns a new sorted array. Like `sort`, it accepts a comparator function similar to the one used in `sort`.

### Performance Results
The benchmark results indicate the number of executions per second for both methods on a specific browser (Chrome 137) running on a Mac OS X 10.15.7.

- **Sort Method**: 8,580,856 executions per second
- **ToSorted Method**: 7,057,707.5 executions per second

### Pros and Cons
#### `sort` Method
- **Pros**:
  - Typically faster, as seen in this benchmark.
  - In-place sorting saves memory.
- **Cons**:
  - Mutates the original array, which may lead to unintended side effects if the original array is needed later in the code.

#### `toSorted` Method
- **Pros**:
  - Non-mutating; the original array remains unchanged, which is beneficial in functional programming paradigms and can prevent side effects.
  - Can be safer to use in scenarios where immutability is a concern.
- **Cons**:
  - Slightly slower as demonstrated in the benchmark.
  - Requires more memory since it creates a new array.

### Other Considerations
- Developers should choose between these methods based on the specific needs of their application, taking into account factors such as performance, memory usage, and the importance of immutability.
- The difference in performance may also vary based on the size of the array and the complexity of the comparator function.
  
### Alternatives
- Apart from the built-in `sort` and `toSorted` methods, developers may use libraries such as **Lodash** or **underscore.js**, which offer additional sorting functions, but with potential trade-offs in terms of performance due to the overhead of library usage.
- Custom sorting algorithms (like QuickSort or MergeSort) can also be implemented if specific optimizations are required, although this often requires more code and is typically less efficient than built-in methods unless tailored for specific use cases.

### Conclusion
This benchmark tests the performance of two sorting methodologies that exhibit trade-offs between mutability and speed. Understanding the implications of using `sort` vs `toSorted` is crucial for software engineers aiming to write efficient and maintainable code.

Sort vs ToSorted 222 (version: 1)

test

Comparing performance of: `sort vs toSorted`

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

sort

toSorted

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 14 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 14 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model gpt-4o-mini, generated one year ago):

Sort vs ToSorted 222 (version: 1)

test

Comparing performance of: sort vs toSorted

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

sort

toSorted

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 14 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 14 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model gpt-4o-mini, generated one year ago):

Related benchmarks

Comparing performance of: `sort vs toSorted`