Benchmark: Map vs ImmutableJs copy

HTML Preparation code:

<script type='text/javascript' src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/immutable/3.8.2/immutable.min.js'></script>

Script Preparation code:

function createLargeObject() {
  return {
    a: "oaishdjoghaisioghagsiohgiosdhgaioshdhgiashdhgohasdghasdiog",
    b: "asiohdjoghasdgioasdhiosdghasohgaoihsdhgioasdhgsdiohgsdhiog",
    c: "oasihdgoashdgiohasdhgasdoghsdihgohasdgsihgasdioghsdigiogga"
  }
}

var map1 = new Map();
for (i = 0; i < 10000; i++) {
  map1.set(i, createLargeObject());
}

var map2 = Immutable.Map(map1)

Tests:

ES
map1 = Object.assign({}, map1, { 1001: createLargeObject() });
Immutable
map2 = map2.set(1001, createLargeObject());

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
ES
Immutable

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

No previous run results

This benchmark does not have any results yet. Be the first one to run it!

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

**Benchmark Explanation**

The provided JSON represents two benchmark test cases, each designed to measure the performance of different approaches for adding an element to a data structure.

**Option 1: ES (ECMAScript)**

The first test case measures the performance of using `Object.assign()` to add an element to an existing object (`map1`). Specifically, it adds a new property-value pair with key `1001` and value `createLargeObject()`, where `createLargeObject()` is a function that returns a large object.

**Pros:**

* Wide compatibility across browsers and platforms
* Simple and intuitive syntax

**Cons:**

* Can lead to performance issues if the object becomes too large or complex
* May not be optimized for performance in some situations (e.g., when using a large number of iterations)

**Option 2: ImmutableJs**

The second test case measures the performance of using an immutable data structure provided by Immutable.js, specifically `Immutable.Map`. The benchmark creates two maps: one from an existing map (`map1`) and another from scratch (`map2`). It then adds a new element to both maps using `set()`.

**Pros:**

* Provides predictable and optimized performance for immutable data structures
* Ensures thread safety and immutability

**Cons:**

* May require additional setup and configuration (e.g., importing Immutable.js library)
* Can be slower than other approaches due to the overhead of creating immutable objects

**Library: ImmutableJs**

Immutable.js is a popular JavaScript library that provides an immutable data structure implementation, ensuring thread safety and predictability in performance. In this benchmark, it's used for its `Map` data structure.

**Other Considerations**

* Other alternatives to ES and ImmutableJs include using `Set` or other data structures, which may offer different trade-offs in terms of performance, memory usage, and compatibility.
* The choice of approach ultimately depends on the specific use case, performance requirements, and personal preference.

In summary, this benchmark tests the performance of two approaches for adding an element to a data structure: ES (using `Object.assign()`) and ImmutableJs (using `Immutable.Map`). Each approach has its pros and cons, which are considered in the context of the benchmark's specific use case.

Related benchmarks:

Map vs ImmutableJs copy (version: 0)

Tests adding an element to a map vs an immutable js map.

Comparing performance of: ES vs Immutable

Created: 7 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

ES

Immutable

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

No previous run results

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