Benchmark: Stable Hash - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

function stableHash(query){
  return JSON.stringify(query, Object.keys(query).sort());
}

function specificHash(query){
  return JSON.stringify(query, ['a', 'b', 'c', 'x', '12']);
}

var test = {b: 'bar', a: 'foo', x: 15, "12": "other", c: 10 };

Tests:

Stable
return stableHash(test);
Specific
return specificHash(test);
Unstable
JSON.stringify(test);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Stable
Specific
Unstable

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.

**Overview of the Benchmark**

The provided benchmark compares three different approaches to hash object values in JavaScript: stable hashing, specific hashing, and unstable hashing (i.e., simply using `JSON.stringify()`). The goal is to determine which approach yields the best performance.

**Stable Hashing**

In this approach, we use a custom function `stableHash` that sorts the keys of the input object before serializing it. This ensures that the resulting string representation of the object is deterministic and predictable, which can be beneficial for certain applications.

Pros:

* Deterministic output
* Predictable performance

Cons:

* Additional sorting step can introduce overhead
* May not be suitable for all use cases where unpredictability is desired

**Specific Hashing**

In this approach, we use a custom function `specificHash` that only sorts a subset of the input object's keys. This allows us to control which properties are included in the hash, potentially improving performance.

Pros:

* Improved performance by reducing the number of sorted keys
* Allows for more targeted optimization

Cons:

* Output is no longer deterministic
* Requires careful consideration of which properties to include in the hash

**Unstable Hashing**

In this approach, we simply use `JSON.stringify()` to serialize the input object. This is a common and straightforward way to convert an object to a string representation.

Pros:

* Simple and efficient
* Works well for most use cases

Cons:

* Output is non-deterministic and potentially unpredictable
* May not be suitable for applications where predictability is required

**Library Usage**

There are no libraries explicitly mentioned in the benchmark definition or test cases. However, it's worth noting that some JavaScript libraries (e.g., Lodash) provide utility functions for working with objects and strings.

**Special JS Features/Syntax**

None of the test cases use any special JavaScript features or syntax beyond the standard `JSON.stringify()` function. The benchmark focuses on comparing different approaches to hash object values without relying on advanced language features.

**Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternatives to this benchmark, consider the following options:

* **V8 Benchmark Suite**: A comprehensive set of benchmarks developed by Google that tests various aspects of JavaScript performance.
* **JSHint**: A popular JavaScript linter that can also be used to run benchmarks and measure performance.
* **Benchmarking libraries**: Libraries like Benchmark.js or SpeedTest provide more advanced benchmarking features and may be suitable for more complex use cases.

Keep in mind that the specific approach and testing framework chosen will depend on your project's requirements and goals.

Related benchmarks:

Stable Hash (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Stable vs Specific vs Unstable

Created: 7 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Stable

Specific

Unstable

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):