Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
object spread vs immutable-js set (large)
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
object spread vs immutable-js
Created:
5 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
HTML Preparation code:
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/immutable/3.8.2/immutable.min.js"></script> <script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/immutability-helper@2.7.0/index.min.js"></script>
Tests:
object spread
let obj = {}; for(i=0;i<10000;i++){ const key = 'key'+i const value = 'value'+i obj = {...obj, [key]: {key, value}} }
immutable-js
let obj = Immutable.Map(); for(i=0;i<10000;i++){ const key = 'key'+i const value = 'value'+i obj = obj.set(key, {key, value}) }
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
object spread
immutable-js
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):
Measuring the performance of JavaScript object manipulation techniques can be a complex task. The provided JSON benchmark definition tests two approaches for updating an object: 1. **Object Spread**: This method uses the spread operator (`{...obj, [key]: {key, value}}`) to create a new object with the updated key-value pair. 2. **Immutable-js Set**: This method uses the `Immutable.js` library to update a Map object with the added key-value pair. **Options Comparison:** * **Object Spread (using spread operator)** Pros: * Easy to implement and read * Works well for small objects or simple updates * Less memory overhead compared to Immutable.js * Native JavaScript support, so no additional library dependency is needed Cons: * Performance can degrade with large objects due to the creation of a new object on each update. * May not be suitable for concurrent updates or complex object manipulation. * **Immutable-js Set (using Immutable.js library)** Pros: * Provides a predictable and consistent performance due to the immutability of Map objects. * Suitable for large objects, concurrent updates, and complex object manipulation. * Reduces memory leaks associated with updating mutable objects. Cons: * Requires additional dependency on the Immutable.js library. * Can introduce overhead due to the use of a third-party library. **Library Overview:** The `Immutable.js` library provides a way to work with immutable data structures, such as Maps and Sets. The `immutability-helper` library is used in conjunction with Immutable.js for additional helper functions. These libraries aim to make working with immutable data more efficient and easier to manage. **Special JS Feature/Syntax:** In this benchmark, the use of spread operator (`{...obj, [key]: {key, value}}`) is a notable feature. This syntax was introduced in ECMAScript 2018 (ES8) as part of the standard specification for JavaScript object spreading and merging. The spread operator allows for creating new objects by copying properties from an existing object. **Alternatives:** Alternative approaches to updating objects include: 1. **Array.prototype.push() + Object.assign():** This method uses `Array.prototype.push()` to add elements to an array, followed by `Object.assign()` to update the entire array with the new key-value pair. 2. **Object.create() + assignment:** This method uses `Object.create()` to create a new object and then assigns values to it using dot notation or bracket notation (`obj[key] = value`). 3. **Using for...of loop with Object.keys():** This method uses a `for...of` loop to iterate over the keys of an object, assigning values to them. Each of these alternatives has its own trade-offs in terms of performance and readability.
Related benchmarks:
object spread vs immutable-js set vs object mutate
Spread operator vs Immutable.js performance for common use cases
object spread vs immutable-js merge 4.3.0
object spread vs immutable-js set vs es6 set
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?