Benchmark: Symbol vs String property square bracket, loop 2

Script Preparation code:


var sym = [Symbol("key1"), Symbol("key2"), Symbol("key3"), Symbol("key4"), Symbol("key5"), Symbol("key6"), Symbol("key7"), Symbol("key8"), Symbol("key9"), Symbol("key0")];
var str = ["key1", "key2", "key3", "key4", "key5", "key6", "key7", "key8", "key9", "key0"]; 
var foo1 = {
  [sym[0]]: 0,
  [sym[1]]: 0,
  [sym[2]]: 0,
  [sym[3]]: 0,
  [sym[4]]: 0,
  [sym[5]]: 0,
  [sym[6]]: 0,
  [sym[7]]: 0,
  [sym[8]]: 0,
  [sym[9]]: 0,
};
var foo2 = {
  [str[0]]: 0,
  [str[1]]: 0,
  [str[2]]: 0,
  [str[3]]: 0,
  [str[4]]: 0,
  [str[5]]: 0,
  [str[6]]: 0,
  [str[7]]: 0,
  [str[8]]: 0,
  [str[9]]: 0
};

Tests:

Symbol
for(const k of sym) foo1[k] = 1;
String
for(const k of str) foo2[k] = 1;
Symbol sum
let sum = 0 for (const k of sym) sum += foo1[k];
String sum
let sum = 0 for (const k of str) sum += foo2[k];

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Symbol
String
Symbol sum
String sum

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll provide an in-depth explanation of the provided benchmark.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark measures the performance difference between using Symbol properties and string indices (also known as arrays) for object access in JavaScript. The benchmark consists of four test cases:

1. `Symbol`: Accessing elements using Symbol properties.
2. `String`: Accessing elements using string indices (arrays).
3. `Symbol sum`: Calculating the sum of element values by iterating over Symbol-located elements.
4. `String sum`: Calculating the sum of element values by iterating over array-located elements.

**Library and Special JS Features**

There is no explicit library mentioned in the benchmark, but JavaScript's built-in `Symbol` feature is used to create unique property names. The `Symbol` feature was introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6) as a way to create new property names that cannot be accessed by string indices.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares two options:

1. **Symbol properties**: Using Symbol properties for object access, where each property has a unique name that can only be accessed using its corresponding Symbol value.
2. **String indices (arrays)**: Using array indices to access elements of an object, where the index is used as both a key and a value.

**Pros and Cons**

**Symbol Properties:**

Pros:

* Unique property names that cannot be accessed by string indices
* Can improve performance due to reduced collisions with existing property names

Cons:

* Less intuitive for developers who are familiar with string indices
* Requires explicit creation of Symbol values using `Symbol()`

**String Indices (Arrays):**

Pros:

* More intuitive and easier to understand, especially for developers familiar with array indexing
* Does not require explicit creation of unique property names

Cons:

* Can result in collisions with existing property names
* May lead to slower performance due to increased lookup times

**Benchmark Results**

The latest benchmark results show the following execution rates per second:

* `String sum`: 2959609.75 executions per second (Chromium 119)
* `Symbol sum`: 2925757.25 executions per second (Chromium 119)
* `String`: 2823161.25 executions per second (Chromium 119)
* `Symbol`: 2816764.0 executions per second (Chromium 119)

These results suggest that accessing elements using Symbol properties is slightly faster than using string indices.

**Other Alternatives**

While the benchmark focuses on Symbol properties and string indices, other alternatives for object access include:

1. **Object Literals**: Using named properties (strings) to access elements of an object.
2. **Numeric Indices**: Accessing elements using numeric values as both keys and values.
3. **Computed Properties**: Using computed property names (e.g., `obj[Symbol('name')]`) for dynamic or runtime-determined property names.

Keep in mind that the performance benefits of each approach depend on specific use cases, code organization, and the trade-offs between developer intuition, maintainability, and performance optimization.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/119.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 119 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Symbol	2816764.0 Ops/sec
String	2823161.2 Ops/sec
Symbol sum	2925757.2 Ops/sec
String sum	2959609.8 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Symbol vs String property square bracket, loop 2 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Symbol vs String vs Symbol sum vs String sum

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Symbol

String

Symbol sum

String sum

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):