Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
omit testing
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
omit (object + object.keys) vs omit for
Created:
5 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
const testObject = { param1: 'test string', param2: 'test string', param3: 'test string', param4: 'test string', param5: 'test string', param6: { a: 1, b: 2 }, param7: { a: 1, b: 2 }, param8: { a: 1, b: 2 }, param9: { a: 1, b: 2 }, param10: { a: 1, b: 2 }, };
Tests:
omit (object + object.keys)
const _omit = (obj, exclusions) => { const result = {}; for (const key of Object.keys(obj)) { if (!exclusions[key]) { result[key] = obj[key]; } } return result; };
omit for
const _omitFor = (obj, exclusions) => { const keys = Object.keys(obj); const result = {}; for (let i = 0; i < keys.length; i++) { if (!exclusions[keys[i]]) { result[keys[i]] = obj[keys[i]]; } } return result; };
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
omit (object + object.keys)
omit for
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):
**Benchmark Explanation** The provided benchmark is designed to measure the performance of two different approaches for implementing the `omit` function in JavaScript. The `omit` function is used to filter out certain properties from an object based on a set of exclusions. **Approaches Compared** There are two approaches being compared: 1. **`_omit` function (Benchmark Definition: " const _omit = ...")**: This approach uses the `Object.keys()` method to iterate over the properties of the input object, and then checks if each property is included in the exclusions array using the `exclusions[key]` syntax. 2. **`_omitFor` function (Benchmark Definition: " const _omitFor = ...")**: This approach uses a separate variable `keys` to store the keys of the input object, and then iterates over this array using a `for` loop. **Pros and Cons** 1. **`_omit` function**: * Pros: + More concise and expressive syntax. + Does not require an additional array for storing keys. * Cons: + May be slower due to the `exclusions[key]` lookup, which can lead to more branching. 2. **`_omitFor` function**: * Pros: + Can be faster due to the use of a separate array for storing keys, which reduces branching. * Cons: + More verbose syntax. + Requires an additional variable `keys`. **Library and Special JS Features** There is no library being used in these benchmark definitions. No special JavaScript features are being tested or used in these benchmarks. **Other Considerations** The performance of these two approaches can vary depending on the specific use case and input data. For example, if the exclusions array is very large, the `exclusions[key]` lookup may become slower due to increased branching. On the other hand, if the exclusions array is relatively small, the `_omitFor` function may be faster. **Alternative Approaches** Other possible approaches for implementing the `omit` function could include: * Using a library like Lodash, which provides an optimized implementation of the `omit` function. * Using a different data structure, such as a Map or a Set, to store the exclusions array. * Implementing a custom lookup algorithm that avoids branching. However, these alternative approaches are not being tested in this benchmark.
Related benchmarks:
optional chaining versus old spice
optional chaining X old spice
or vs some
or vs some 2
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?