Benchmark: destruct object - MeasureThat.net

Tests:

Destruct with map
const target = { "fluid": true, "marginLess": true, "aria-label": "date", "value": "" } function destruct( target, keys ) { const destructedEntries = new Map(); const originalEntries = new Map(); Object.entries(target).forEach(([index, value]) => { if (keys.includes(index)) { destructedEntries.set(index, value); return; } originalEntries.set(index, value); }); return [ Object.fromEntries(destructedEntries), Object.fromEntries(originalEntries), ]; } destruct(target, ["marginLess", "value"])
Destruct with object
const target = { "fluid": true, "marginLess": true, "aria-label": "date", "value": "" } function destruct( target, keys ) { const destructedEntries = {}; const originalEntries = {}; Object.entries(target).forEach(([index, value]) => { if (keys.includes(index)) { destructedEntries[index] = value; return; } originalEntries[index] = value; }); return [destructedEntries, originalEntries]; } destruct(target, ["marginLess", "value"])

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Destruct with map
Destruct with object

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 and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Definition**

The provided JSON defines a benchmark for a JavaScript function called `destruct`. The function takes two arguments: an object `target` and an array of keys `keys`.

**Script Preparation Code**

There is no script preparation code provided, which means that the test environment is initialized without any specific setup or configuration.

**Html Preparation Code**

There is also no html preparation code provided, which suggests that the benchmark only tests JavaScript performance and doesn't involve rendering HTML or interacting with DOM elements.

**Individual Test Cases**

The benchmark consists of two individual test cases:

1. **Destruct with map**
This test case uses a `Map` data structure to store the destructed entries. A `Map` is an object that stores key-value pairs, where each key is unique and maps to a specific value.
2. **Destruct with object**
This test case uses an object literal to store the destructed entries. An object literal is a syntax for creating objects using the `{}` notation.

**Options being compared**

The benchmark compares the performance of two approaches:

* Using a `Map` to store the destructed entries
* Using an object literal to store the destructed entries

**Pros and Cons of each approach**

1. **Using a Map:**
	* Pros:
		+ Fast lookups and insertions (O(1) time complexity)
		+ Efficient memory usage (since maps only store unique keys-value pairs)
	* Cons:
		+ May require additional memory allocation for the map object
2. **Using an object literal:**
	* Pros:
		+ Familiar syntax for most developers
		+ Easy to read and understand
	* Cons:
		+ Slower lookups and insertions (O(n) time complexity)
		+ May result in slower performance due to the need to iterate over the object's properties

**Library and purpose**

In both test cases, the `destruct` function uses a `Map` or an object literal as its internal data structure. The purpose of these data structures is to efficiently store and retrieve the values corresponding to each key.

**Special JS feature or syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntaxes used in this benchmark.

**Other alternatives**

If you were to rewrite this benchmark, you could consider alternative approaches, such as:

* Using a `WeakMap` instead of a regular map (which might be more suitable for storing small, lightweight data structures)
* Using a more efficient data structure, like an array or a sparse array
* Optimizing the `destruct` function itself using techniques like memoization or caching

However, without more information about the specific requirements and constraints of this benchmark, it's difficult to suggest alternative approaches.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/114.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 114 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Destruct with map	609460.3 Ops/sec
Destruct with object	2326533.8 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

destruct object (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Destruct with map vs Destruct with object

Created: one year ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

Destruct with map

Destruct with object

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):