Browse the latest JavaScript performance benchmarks created by the community.
No description provided
No description provided
No description provided
No description provided
No description provided
Compares the three mechanisms for combining arrays with 1k arrays
No description provided
No description provided
No description provided
No description provided
Intent is to measure the benefit of creating multiple "cache projections" (for lack of a better name) when using Redux Toolkit's EntityAdapter. It already handles everything in an "entities" object (keys are ids, values are the entity) and manages a list of ids separately. If we want to access a specific item based on the value of another key on that object, we are forced to loop through all the entities (either with Object.keys, Object.values, a for..in, or using the ids list) to find it. The solution tested here is to maintain another object that's simply a mapping between the key we want to look for and the id of the corresponding object for fast access. It is obviously faster, but by how much?
Intent is to measure the benefit of creating multiple "cache projections" (for lack of a better name) when using Redux Toolkit's EntityAdapter. It already handles everything in an "entities" object (keys are ids, values are the entity) and manages a list of ids separately. If we want to access a specific item based on the value of another key on that object, we are forced to loop through all the entities (either with Object.keys, Object.values, a for..in, or using the ids list) to find it. The solution tested here is to maintain another object that's simply a mapping between the key we want to look for and the id of the corresponding object for fast access. It is obviously faster, but by how much?
Lookup of map vs object
Intent is to measure the benefit of creating multiple "cache projections" (for lack of a better name) when using Redux Toolkit's EntityAdapter. It already handles everything in an "entities" object (keys are ids, values are the entity) and manages a list of ids separately. If we want to access a specific item based on the value of another key on that object, we are forced to loop through all the entities (either with Object.keys, Object.values, a for..in, or using the ids list) to find it. The solution tested here is to maintain another object that's simply a mapping between the key we want to look for and the id of the corresponding object for fast access. It is obviously faster, but by how much?
Intent is to measure the benefit of creating multiple "cache projections" (for lack of a better name) when using Redux Toolkit's EntityAdapter. It already handles everything in an "entities" object (keys are ids, values are the entity) and manages a list of ids separately. If we want to access a specific item based on the value of another key on that object, we are forced to loop through all the entities (either with Object.values, a for..in or using the ids list) to find it. The solution tested here is to maintain another object that's simply a mapping between the key we want to look for and the id of the corresponding object for fast access.
No description provided
bvbvcbvvb
No description provided
No description provided
No description provided
Vanilla JS VS JQuery 3.6.0 DOM perfomance
No description provided
which one is faster for reaching last item of an array
No description provided
array include vs set has