Benchmark: Testtttt - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

function getKey(numb) {
  return numb % 2 ? 'odd' : 'even'
}
function objSet(obj, key, value) {
    obj[key] = value
    return obj
}
function objMergeArr(obj, key, ...values) {
    obj[key].push(...values)
    return obj
}
function arrayPush(arr, ...values) {
    arr.push(...values)
    return arr
}

Tests:

objMergeArr
function getKey(numb) { return numb % 2 ? 'odd' : 'even' } function objSet(obj, key, value) { obj[key] = value return obj } function objMergeArr(obj, key, ...values) { obj[key].push(...values) return obj } function arrayPush(arr, ...values) { arr.push(...values) return arr } const test = Array(100).fill().map((_, index) => index).reduce((acc, val) => { const key = getKey(val) return objMergeArr(acc, key, val) }, { odd: [], even: [] })
objSet
function getKey(numb) { return numb % 2 ? 'odd' : 'even' } function objSet(obj, key, value) { obj[key] = value return obj } function objMergeArr(obj, key, ...values) { obj[key].push(...values) return obj } function arrayPush(arr, ...values) { arr.push(...values) return arr } const test = Array(100).fill().map((_, index) => index).reduce((acc, val) => { const key = getKey(val) return objSet(acc, key, arrayPush(acc[key], val)) }, { odd: [], even: [] })
spread
function getKey(numb) { return numb % 2 ? 'odd' : 'even' } function objSet(obj, key, value) { obj[key] = value return obj } function objMergeArr(obj, key, ...values) { obj[key].push(...values) return obj } function arrayPush(arr, ...values) { arr.push(...values) return arr } const test = Array(100).fill().map((_, index) => index).reduce((acc, val) => { const key = getKey(val) return { ...acc, [key]: [...acc[key], val] } }, { odd: [], even: [] })

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
objMergeArr
objSet
spread

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 benchmarking JSON and individual test cases.

**Benchmark Definition JSON:**

The provided JSON defines a set of functions:

1. `getKey(numb)`: Returns `'odd'` if `numb` is odd, and `'even'` otherwise.
2. `objSet(obj, key, value)`: Sets the value for the specified `key` in the object `obj`, and returns the updated object.
3. `objMergeArr(obj, key, ...values)`: Appends the provided values to the array associated with the specified `key` in the object `obj`.
4. `arrayPush(arr, ...values)`: Appends the provided values to the end of the array `arr`.

The JSON also defines a script preparation code that creates an initial object with two properties: `'odd'` and `'even'`, each initialized as empty arrays.

**Individual Test Cases:**

Each test case has a "Benchmark Definition" field, which contains a subset of the functions defined in the Benchmark Definition JSON. The test cases are:

1. `objMergeArr`: Uses `getKey`, `objSet`, and `arrayPush` to merge an array into an object.
2. `objSet`: Uses `getKey` and `objSet` to set values in an object, but uses `arrayPush` incorrectly (should be used with the existing value).
3. `spread`: Uses `getKey` and creates a new object with spread syntax (`{ ...acc, [key]: [...acc[key], val] }`) to merge an array into an object.

**Options Compared:**

The test cases compare three approaches:

1. **objMergeArr**: Merges an array into an object using the `arrayPush` function.
2. **objSet**: Sets values in an object using the `objSet` function, but uses incorrect syntax with `arrayPush`.
3. **spread**: Uses spread syntax to merge an array into an object.

**Pros and Cons:**

1. **objMergeArr**:
	* Pros: Simple and straightforward.
	* Cons: Incorrectly uses `arrayPush`, which can lead to performance issues if the array is large.
2. **objSet**:
	* Pros: None notable.
	* Cons: Incorrect syntax with `arrayPush`, which can lead to performance issues.
3. **spread**:
	* Pros: Uses modern spread syntax, which can be more efficient and readable.
	* Cons: None notable.

**Other Considerations:**

* The use of `const` in the script preparation code ensures that the initial object is not modified accidentally.
* The use of `...values` in `objMergeArr` and `spread` allows for flexible handling of variable numbers of values to be appended to an array.

**Alternatives:**

If you wanted to compare other approaches, you could add test cases like:

* Using a different library (e.g., Lodash's `merge`) or a custom function to merge arrays into objects.
* Comparing the performance of using `Object.assign()` instead of spread syntax.
* Testing different data structures (e.g., using an array as the object's value)

Related benchmarks:

Testtttt (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: objMergeArr vs objSet vs spread

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

objMergeArr

objSet

spread

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):