Benchmark: BT Switch vs Object Literal

Script Preparation code:

num = Math.floor(Math.random() * 20);

Tests:

Switch
function getVal(key) { switch (key) { case 1: return 'A' case 2: return 'B' case 3: return 'C' case 4: return 'A' case 5: return 'A' case 6: return 'A' case 7: return 'A' case 8: return 'A' case 9: return 'A' case 10: return 'A' case 11: return 'A' case 12: return 'B' case 13: return 'C' case 14: return 'A' case 15: return 'A' case 16: return 'A' case 17: return 'A' case 18: return 'A' case 19: return 'A' case 20: return 'A' } } console.log(getVal(num))
Object Literal
var objLiteral = { 1: 'A', 2: 'B', 3: 'C', 4: 'A', 5: 'A', 6: 'A', 7: 'A', 8: 'A', 9: 'A', 10: 'A', 11: 'A', 12: 'B', 13: 'C', 14: 'A', 15: 'A', 16: 'A', 17: 'A', 18: 'A', 19: 'A', 20: 'A', } console.log(objLiteral[num])

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Switch
Object Literal

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.

I'll explain what's tested in the provided JSON benchmark.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is comparing two approaches to accessing and returning values from an object:

1. **Switch statement**: This approach uses a `switch` statement to determine which value to return based on the input `key`.
2. **Object Literal**: This approach accesses the object using its literal syntax, where the key-value pairs are defined as properties of the object.

**Options compared**

The benchmark is comparing the performance of these two approaches:

* **Switch statement**: This approach uses a `switch` statement with multiple cases to determine which value to return.
* **Object Literal**: This approach accesses the object using its literal syntax, where the key-value pairs are defined as properties of the object.

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief summary of the pros and cons of each approach:

**Switch Statement:**

Pros:

* Can be more efficient for large numbers of cases, since JavaScript can optimize the jump table.
* Can be easier to read and understand, especially for simple cases with few alternatives.

Cons:

* Can be slower for small numbers of cases, since JavaScript has to fall through to the next case.
* Requires explicit case labels, which can make it harder to add or remove cases.

**Object Literal:**

Pros:

* Generally faster than switch statements, since it's a direct property access.
* Easier to modify or extend, since you don't need to worry about adding or removing case labels.

Cons:

* Less readable and maintainable for large numbers of cases.
* Requires explicit property names, which can make it harder to understand the code.

**Library used**

In this benchmark, no specific library is required. However, in general, libraries like Lodash or Ramda might be used for similar operations.

**Special JS feature or syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax used in this benchmark. The focus is on comparing two basic approaches to accessing and returning values from an object.

**Other alternatives**

Some alternative approaches could include:

* Using a `lookup` table or cache, where the values are precomputed and stored.
* Using a more efficient data structure, like a trie or a hash table.
* Using a different approach altogether, like using a function with multiple arguments or returns.

Note that these alternatives would likely be overkill for this specific benchmark, which is designed to compare two basic approaches.

Related benchmarks:

BT Switch vs Object Literal (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Switch vs Object Literal

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Switch

Object Literal

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):