Benchmark: Benchmark of Object.keys multiple calls

Script Preparation code:

var object = {
  1: 2,
  3: 4,
  5: 6,
  7: 8,
  9: 10,
}

Tests:

Cache
const cached = Object.keys(object); const sum = 0; for (let index = 0; index < cached; index++) { sum += cached[index]; } for (let index = 0; index < cached; index++) { sum += cached[index]; }
Not Cached
const sum = 0; for (let index = 0; index < Object.keys(object); index++) { sum += cached[index]; } for (let index = 0; index < Object.keys(object); index++) { sum += cached[index]; }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Cache
Not Cached

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.

Let's break down the provided JSON benchmark definition and test cases to understand what's being tested.

**Benchmark Definition:**
The benchmark measures the performance of two approaches when summing up the values in an object using `Object.keys()`. The object contains 7 key-value pairs with increasing integer keys (1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, and 13). The goal is to calculate the sum of all these values.

**Script Preparation Code:**
The script defines a variable `object` with the specified key-value pairs.

**Html Preparation Code:**
This field is empty, which means that no HTML code needs to be prepared before running the benchmark.

**Test Cases:**

1. **Cache:**
	* The benchmark definition is identical to the one above.
	* However, this time, the `Object.keys()` method returns a cached array of keys from the `object` variable.
	* The loop iterates over this cached array and adds each value to a running sum (`sum`). This approach reuses the same array of keys multiple times, potentially reducing overhead due to repeated lookups in the object.
2. **Not Cached:**
	* The benchmark definition is identical to the one above, but with an additional `const cached` variable declared before the loop.
	* Inside the loop, `Object.keys()` method returns a new array of keys from the `object` variable each time, effectively recalculating the set of keys on every iteration. This approach does not reuse any cached information.

**Pros and Cons:**

1. **Cache Approach (Not Cached in Benchmark Definition):**
	* Pros:
		+ Reduces overhead due to repeated lookups in the object.
		+ Can be faster for larger objects or more complex iterations.
	* Cons:
		+ The first time `Object.keys()` is called, it may take longer due to the initial lookup in the object's property list.
2. **Not Cached Approach:**
	* Pros:
		+ Faster for smaller objects or simpler iterations (e.g., fewer keys).
		+ May have better performance if the object changes frequently during the iteration.
	* Cons:
		+ Repeated lookups in the object can be slower.

**Library and Its Purpose:**
In this benchmark, there is no explicitly mentioned library. However, the `Object.keys()` method relies on the ECMAScript standard for JavaScript objects. The `const cached` variable declaration and usage are also valid JavaScript syntax.

**Special JS Features/Syntax:**
This benchmark uses a common JavaScript feature called "const" declarations with block scope (e.g., `const cached = ...;`). This ensures that the `cached` variable is redeclared in each iteration, effectively creating new scopes for the variables. No special syntax or features are used here.

**Alternative Approaches:**
Other alternatives to these approaches might include:

1. **Using a different data structure**, such as an array of indices or a sparse array with keys explicitly defined.
2. **Optimizing the object lookup**, using techniques like caching or memoization for repeated lookups.
3. **Parallelizing or multi-threading** the iteration to take advantage of multiple CPU cores.

Please note that these alternatives might not be directly relevant to the specific question, but they demonstrate the flexibility and customizability of JavaScript benchmarks.

Related benchmarks:

Benchmark of Object.keys multiple calls (version: 0)

Cache vs not using cache

Comparing performance of: Cache vs Not Cached

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Cache

Not Cached

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):