Benchmark: toArray vs toJS - MeasureThat.net

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/immutable/3.8.1/immutable.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var list = Immutable.List();

for (var i = 0; i < 100; i++) {
	list.push(i);
}

Tests:

toArray
list.toArray();
toJS
list.toJS();

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
toArray
toJS

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one month ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

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

**Benchmark Definition JSON**

The provided JSON represents a benchmark named "toArray vs toJS" created on MeasureThat.net. The benchmark involves two JavaScript functions: `toArray()` and `toJS()`, which are part of the Immutable.js library.

**Immutable.js Library**

Immutable.js is a JavaScript library that provides a way to work with immutable data structures, meaning that once a value is created, it cannot be changed. This approach helps ensure thread safety and predictability in concurrent programming.

The two functions being tested are:

1. `list.toArray()`: Converts an Immutable List object to a regular JavaScript array.
2. `list.toJS()`: Converts an Immutable List object to a plain JavaScript array.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares the performance of these two approaches: using `toArray()` and using `toJS()`. The idea is to test which method is faster for converting an Immutable List object to a regular JavaScript array.

**Pros and Cons**

Here are some pros and cons of each approach:

1. **`list.toArray()`**:
	* Pros:
		+ May be more efficient since it creates a new array object directly from the Immutable List.
		+ Can provide better performance for small lists.
	* Cons:
		+ Creates a new array object, which may lead to memory allocation overhead for large lists.
2. **`list.toJS()`**:
	* Pros:
		+ More flexible since it converts the entire list to a plain JavaScript array, including all elements and any nested data structures.
		+ Can be useful when working with complex data structures that cannot be easily converted using `toArray()`.
	* Cons:
		+ May be slower due to the overhead of converting the entire list.

**Special JS Features**

There is no special JavaScript feature or syntax being tested in this benchmark. The focus is on comparing two different approaches for converting Immutable List objects to regular JavaScript arrays.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're interested in alternative methods for working with immutable data structures, consider the following:

* Other libraries like Lodash or Ramda provide similar functionality to Immutable.js.
* You can also use plain JavaScript objects and arrays to implement immutability, but this may require more manual management of data updates.

Keep in mind that the choice of library and implementation depends on your specific project requirements, performance needs, and personal preference.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/116.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 116 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
toArray	7531294.5 Ops/sec
toJS	4966751.5 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

toArray vs toJS (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: toArray vs toJS

Created: 7 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

toArray

toJS

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one month ago):