Benchmark: ASCII Dict - MeasureThat.net

Tests:

for loop dict
let dictionary = []; for (let i = 0; i < 256; dictionary.push(String.fromCharCode(i++)));
Array.from dict
let dictionary = Array.from({length:256},(i,j)=>String.fromCharCode(j))
String serialize dict
let dictionary = [..."\u0000\u0001\u0002\u0003\u0004\u0005\u0006\u0007\b\t\n\u000b\f\r\u000e\u000f\u0010\u0011\u0012\u0013\u0014\u0015\u0016\u0017\u0018\u0019\u001a\u001b\u001c\u001d\u001e\u001f !\"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~€‚ƒ„…†‡ˆ‰Š‹ŒŽ‘’“”•–—˜™š›œžŸ ¡¢£¤¥¦§¨©ª«¬®¯°±²³´µ¶·¸¹º»¼½¾¿ÀÁÂÃÄÅÆÇÈÉÊËÌÍÎÏÐÑÒÓÔÕÖ×ØÙÚÛÜÝÞßàáâãäåæçèéêëìíîïðñòóôõö÷øùúûüýþÿ"]

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
for loop dict
Array.from dict
String serialize dict

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 3 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/92.0.4515.131 Safari/537.36 Edg/92.0.902.73

Browser/OS: Chrome 92 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
for loop dict	28860.1 Ops/sec
Array.from dict	20963.8 Ops/sec
String serialize dict	786948.3 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

**Benchmark Overview**

MeasureThat.net is a website that allows users to create and run JavaScript microbenchmarks. The provided benchmark definition represents a series of tests aimed at measuring the performance of different approaches for creating an array or object representing ASCII characters.

**Script Preparation Code Analysis**

The script preparation code is empty in this case, which means that the test cases will be executed from scratch without any pre-initialized variables or objects.

**Test Cases**

There are three test cases:

1. **"for loop dict"**
This test creates an array of 256 strings using a `for` loop, where each iteration pushes the corresponding ASCII character to the array.
2. **"Array.from dict"**
This test uses the `Array.from()` method with a callback function that returns a string representing an ASCII character at index `i`.
3. **"String serialize dict"**
This test creates an object (not explicitly declared as an array) from a string containing 256 unique ASCII characters, one per line.

**Library and Functionality**

* None of the test cases use any external libraries.
* The `Array.from()` method is used in Test Case 2. This method takes an iterable as an argument and returns a new array populated with the elements of that iterable. In this case, it's used to create an array of ASCII characters.

**Special JavaScript Features**

The tests do not use any special JavaScript features or syntax. However, it's worth noting that the `String.fromCharCode()` function is used in Test Case 1 to convert numbers to their corresponding ASCII characters.

**Benchmark Results Analysis**

The latest benchmark results show three test cases with different performance characteristics:

* **"for loop dict"**: The fastest execution rate (786948.3125 executions per second) on a desktop device running Windows and Chrome 92.
* **"Array.from dict"**: A slower execution rate (28860.12109375 executions per second) compared to the `for` loop approach, likely due to the overhead of creating an array with a callback function.
* **"String serialize dict"**: The slowest execution rate (20963.849609375 executions per second) on the same device and browser.

**Alternatives**

Other alternatives for creating arrays or objects representing ASCII characters include:

* Using a `Map` object instead of an array, which could provide better performance for large datasets.
* Using a library like Lodash's `fromPairs()` method to create an object from an array of key-value pairs.
* Using a language-agnostic approach, such as using binary data or a compact format like JSON.

**Pros and Cons**

Each approach has its pros and cons:

* **For Loop Approach**:
	+ Pros: Easy to understand, low overhead.
	+ Cons: May be slower due to array push operations.
* **Array.from() Method**:
	+ Pros: Concise, efficient.
	+ Cons: May have higher overhead due to callback function creation.
* **String Serialize Dictionary**:
	+ Pros: Simple, easy to understand.
	+ Cons: Slowest execution rate among the three approaches.

These alternatives can be considered when dealing with large datasets or performance-critical code.

Related benchmarks:

ASCII Dict (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: for loop dict vs Array.from dict vs String serialize dict

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

for loop dict

Array.from dict

String serialize dict

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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