Benchmark: testasdfs - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:


var funcMap = {
  'a': function() { return 1; },
  'b': function() { return 2; },
  'c': function() { return 3; },
  'd': function() { return 4; },
  'e': function() { return 5; }
}


function getRandomKey() {
  var rIdx = Math.floor(Math.random() * 5);
  return Object.keys(funcMap)[rIdx];
}

Tests:

using funcMap
var key = getRandomKey(); var x = funcMap[key](); console.log(x);
using switch
var key = getRandomKey(); var x; switch(key) { case 'a': x = 1; break; case 'b': x = 2; break; case 'c': x = 3; break; case 'd': x = 4; break; case 'e': x = 5; break; } console.log(x);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
using funcMap
using switch

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 provided benchmark definition and test cases.

**Benchmark Definition:**
The benchmark definition is a JSON object that represents a JavaScript microbenchmark. It has three main sections:

* **Name**: A unique name for the benchmark, which in this case is "testasdfs".
* **Description**: A brief description of the benchmark, which is just "test".
* **Script Preparation Code**: This section contains JavaScript code that prepares the environment for the benchmark. In this case, it defines an object `funcMap` with five functions (a, b, c, d, e) and a function `getRandomKey()` that returns a random key from the `funcMap` object.

**Individual Test Cases:**
The benchmark definition includes two test cases:

* **"using funcMap"`**: This test case uses the `funcMap` object to retrieve a function based on a randomly generated key. It logs the result of calling this function.
* **"using switch"`**: This test case uses a `switch` statement to execute different blocks of code based on the value of the `key` variable, which is also generated randomly.

**Options Compared:**
The two test cases compare the performance of using an object map (`funcMap`) versus a `switch` statement to retrieve and execute functions dynamically.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach:**

* **Using `funcMap`:**
	+ Pros:
		- More concise and expressive code
		- Can be faster for large numbers of cases, since JavaScript can use caching and optimization techniques
	+ Cons:
		- May have higher memory overhead due to the need to store the object map and its contents
		- Can be slower if the number of cases is too high, since JavaScript needs to look up each case in the map
* **Using `switch`:**
	+ Pros:
		- Generally faster and more efficient, especially for small to medium-sized numbers of cases
		- Less memory overhead than using an object map
	+ Cons:
		- Can be longer and less readable code, since each case needs to have a separate block of code

**Library Used:**
The `getRandomKey()` function is not a built-in JavaScript library; it's a custom implementation that returns a random key from the `funcMap` object. This function is likely used to simulate real-world scenarios where dynamic key lookup is needed.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax:**
None of the provided code uses any special JavaScript features or syntax, such as `async/await`, `promises`, or experimental JavaScript APIs.

**Other Alternatives:**
There are other approaches that could be used to implement this benchmark, such as:

* **Dynamic Function Invocation using `call()` or `apply()`:** Instead of using an object map or a `switch` statement, you could use the `call()` or `apply()` methods to invoke functions dynamically based on a key.
* **Using `Map` instead of `Object`:** You could use JavaScript's built-in `Map` data structure instead of an object map (`funcMap`) for dynamic key lookup.
* **Using a library like Lodash:** You could use a utility library like Lodash to implement the dynamic function invocation logic.

However, these alternatives are not explicitly mentioned in the benchmark definition and may require additional code changes.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 8 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/53.0.2785.101 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 53 on Windows 7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
using funcMap	86974.1 Ops/sec
using switch	88378.8 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

testasdfs (version: 0)

test

Comparing performance of: using funcMap vs using switch

Created: 8 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

using funcMap

using switch

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):