Benchmark: key number vs string number

HTML Preparation code:

<!--your preparation HTML code goes here-->

Script Preparation code:

/*your preparation JavaScript code goes here
To execute async code during the script preparation, wrap it as function globalMeasureThatScriptPrepareFunction, example:*/
async function globalMeasureThatScriptPrepareFunction() {
    // This function is optional, feel free to remove it.
    // await someThing();
}

Tests:

number as key
/*When writing async/deferred tests, use `deferred.resolve()` to mark test as done*/ const map1 = new Map(); for (let counter = 0; counter < 1000; counter++) { map1.set(counter, `value_${counter}`); }
string inter as key
const map2 = new Map(); for (let counter = 0; counter < 1000; counter++) { map2.set(`selector_${counter}`, `value_${counter}`); }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
number as key
string inter as key

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/138.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 138 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

number as key

31K/s

string inter as key

18K/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ number as key	30,822 Ops/sec
string inter as key	18,080 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

The benchmark being tested compares the performance of using numbers as keys versus using strings as keys in a JavaScript `Map` object. Here’s a breakdown of what is tested, options compared, and other considerations:

### Options Compared
1. **Number as Key**:
   - **Test Case**: 
     ```javascript
     const map1 = new Map();
     for (let counter = 0; counter < 1000; counter++) {
         map1.set(counter, `value_${counter}`);
     }
     ```
   - **Description**: This test uses numbers (`counter`) as keys in a `Map`. The keys range from 0 to 999.

2. **String as Key**:
   - **Test Case**:
     ```javascript
     const map2 = new Map();
     for (let counter = 0; counter < 1000; counter++) {
         map2.set(`selector_${counter}`, `value_${counter}`);
     }
     ```
   - **Description**: This test uses strings (e.g., `selector_0`, `selector_1`, ..., `selector_999`) as keys in the `Map`.

### Pros and Cons
- **Using Numbers as Keys**:
  - **Pros**:
    - Potentially faster because numbers can be compared and stored more efficiently than strings; they require less processing overhead.
    - May consume less memory compared to strings, resulting in better performance during lookups.
  - **Cons**:
    - Limited to numeric keys, which might not fit all use cases.

- **Using Strings as Keys**:
  - **Pros**:
    - More flexible since keys can be descriptive strings, offering better readability and meaning for the key-value pairs.
    - Suitable for cases where the keys are not strictly numerical and need to represent unique identifiers or names.
  - **Cons**:
    - Generally slower performance in comparison to numeric keys, due to the overhead of dealing with string operations, encoding, and comparisons.
    - Increased memory usage because strings consume more space compared to numbers.

### Alternative Considerations
In addition to using `Map`, there are other alternatives and data structures that could be used for key-value storage in JavaScript:

1. **Object**:
   - Objects are the traditional way to store key-value pairs in JavaScript. However, they do not allow arbitrary keys of any type — keys are always converted to strings. This can lead to unexpected behavior when using non-string keys.
   
2. **Set**:
   - While not a direct alternative to `Map` in terms of key-value pairs, `Set` can be used for unique collections of values. However, it does not store key-value relationships.

3. **Using WeakMap**:
   - A `WeakMap` allows for objects as keys and provides garbage collection for keys that are no longer referenced elsewhere. This is useful for storing private data tied to specific objects.

### Conclusion
The benchmark results indicate that the performance of using numbers as keys in a `Map` is distinctly better than using strings, with the respective executions per second being significantly higher for numeric keys (30822.25) compared to string keys (18079.78). This result suggests that when performance is critical and the keys can be represented numerically, using numbers as keys may be the more efficient choice. However, the ultimate decision on which approach to use should also consider the nature of the data and the need for key descriptiveness.

key number vs string number (version: 1)

Comparing performance of: `number as key vs string inter as key`

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

number as key

string inter as key

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

key number vs string number (version: 1)

Comparing performance of: number as key vs string inter as key

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

number as key

string inter as key

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: `number as key vs string inter as key`